Jesse Vail sued an Illinois board of education in federal court over a contract dispute. The court awarded Vail damages, the decision was upheld on appeal, and the U.S. Supreme Court will be reviewing the decision in 1984. (MD)

Discusses recent court cases that illustrate situations wherein exhaustion of administrative or State court remedies must be effected before plaintiffs can resort to Federal Courts. (JF)

Identifies criteria relating to procedural due process from current judicial opinions, rulings of state attorneys general, and state administrative codes; applies the criteria to an analysis of school policies; and suggests guidelines for public school districts in the assessment, implementation, and revision of policies relating to procedural due…

In a case involving an injured football player, an 11th Circuit judge viewed a coach's refusal to stop a fight as corporal punishment. Federal courts in five circuits have ruled that excessive corporal punishment violates the Due Process Clause if it is so brutal and harmful that it shocks the court's conscience. (MLH)

After reviewing the history of corporal punishment in schools, author discusses "Ingraham v. Wright," wherein the U.S. Supreme Court found that the use of corporal punishment in schools was not unconstitutional. Calls for the federal courts to ensure that a student's 14th Amendment liberty interest is protected when subjected to…

Chapter 1 of a book on school law, this article analyzes the role of the U.S. Supreme Court, and contends that there has been a judicial takeover of functions that had been delegated by the Constitution to the states and to the people. Specifically, the author argues that much of the Supreme Court's expansion of its powers rests on the selective…

This chapter on liability covers a number of cases alleging negligence by colleges, universities, and university hospitals filed by patients and injured students. Liability issues are also part of defamation of character suits. Oral statements are known as slander, while written statements which defame are called libel. In certain situations,…

This case is significant because it goes further than any other earlier decision in describing the outlines of the substantive due process concept as it applies to school discipline. (Author)

In "Clark v Whiting," a federal appeals court affirmed the district court's dismissal of a biology teacher's suit contending that he was denied due process and equal protection in being refused promotion to full professor. (IRT)

The "Horowitz" and "Ewing" decisions defined the rights to due process in academic matters on the public postsecondary campus. This study bring the law forward since the 1978 and 1985 Supreme Court decisions by identifying and analyzing 59 cases. (142 footnotes) (MLF)

Fourteen years ago in "Goss v. Lopez," the Supreme Court dealt with the procedural due process required when students are suspended for 10 days or less. Examines how case law has developed in lower federal and state courts from this decision. (MLF)

As a result of recent court litigation, it seems that a school district may require that the employee immediately notify the district of her state of pregnancy and of the intended beginning of her leave, that the employee furnish a doctor's statement as to her physical well-being and ability to continue work, that she begin her leave with…

A federal court awarded attorney fees in a P.L. 94-142 case on the basis of violation of a handicapped student's due process rights, and the U.S. Surpeme Court will review another P.L. 94-142 case that could have an impact on special education budgets. (DCS)

In DesRoches v Caprio, federal district court ruled in favor of Jim DesRoches who had decided not to consent to a search of his backpack for a pair of allegedly stolen sneakers. Judge Robert G. Doumar decided the need to find the stolen sneakers did not outweigh the students' privacy interest and offered guidelines about school searches for stolen…

A U.S. Court of Appeals has upheld significant portions of an arrangement allowing Rutgers University faculty to pay agency fees in lieu of union dues and still be covered by a collective bargaining contract, despite contention that aspects of the agreement violated their constitutional rights to free speech. (MSE)