ELPS Comp Exam Court Cases
Hartzell v Connell
Cannot impose a fee for educational activities offered by high school
Peter W v San Francisco
A high school grad sought damages for what he alleged was “inadequate instruction”. Ruling in favor of school system. How can you find fault where a student has failed to learn?
Ingraham v Wright(not right…)
Students who were paddled in school argued it was cruel and unusual.

Wanted the right to be heard before a physical punishment was given. Went to supreme court. They lost 5-4. Corporal punishment is not entirely considered a violation of due process for students!

Mt Healthy v Doyle(healthy free speech)
Protects the rights of non-tenured teachers free speech
Pickering v Board of EdPickering v Board of Ed
Teachers have 1st amendment right of freedom of expression.
Hoyem vs Manhattan Beach
Schools have a duty to supervise students during school time.

Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot

Premium Partner
From $18.00 per page
4,8 / 5
Writers Experience
Recommended Service
From $13.90 per page
4,6 / 5
Writers Experience
From $20.00 per page
4,5 / 5
Writers Experience
* All Partners were chosen among 50+ writing services by our Customer Satisfaction Team

Kid left schools grounds before end of scheduled classes.

Dailey v Lausdhappened daily..


Kids slap-fightinglack of or ineffective supervisions constitutes negligence
Lee v Weisman
Prayer not allowed at public school graduation
Pierce v Society of Sisters
Private school attendance is compulsory, just like public school
Plessy v Ferguson
Separate but equal – segregation of schools
Brown v Topeka
Separate does not mean equal. Overturned Plessy!
Wood v Strickland
School boards are not immune from liability for monetary damages if the official knew that the action taken would violate the rights of the person affected.
Bartel v Palos Verdes
School does not owe a general duty to supervise all persons who use its playground or to secure premise against persons who may enter and injure themselves therein.
Carey v Piphus
Due process case.

Court can award damages based on violation of due process, without having proof of actual injury.

Serrano v Priest
CA – required equal funding of schools across the state, regardless of the wealth of local community.
Allen v Casper casper – contract
Contract law generally governs expulsion from private school.
New Jersey V TLO
Justifies student searches based on reasonable suspicion
Gebser V Lago Vista
School is not liable for damages under Title IX unless the person who is to investigate claims of harassment knew of situation and failed to respond. District in this case, never knew so could not be liable for failing to respond
Davis V Monroe
Title IX – If actual knowledge and deliberate indifference on the part of the board is evident, a school district can be held liable.

Jeglin V San Jacinto
CA dress code that prohibits students from wearing gang-related clothes in school.
Tinker v Des Moines
Students’ rights to freedom of speech and expression
San Antonio v Rodriguez
Education is not among rights afforded explicit protection under constitution
Goss V Lopez
Upheld students’ rights to due process prior to expulsion.
PARC v Pennsylvania
State of PA did not provide education for disabled kids. This changed that.
Clyde K v Puyallup SD  Puyallup – placement
When disabled child’s behaviorial problems prevent him and others from learning, more restrictive placement can be used.
Hazelwood v Kuhlmeier
Upheld authority of school officials to censor school newspaper
Plyler v Doe(plier – can’t take away $$)
Funding for children who are illegal aliens cannot be withheld from public school
Rose v Council for Better Ed(roses – Kentucky – anti texas)
Education is a right in the state’s constitution.

More about – adequate education rather than equitable funding.

McInnis CasesInnis — Illinois
Court ruled that equal expenditures were inappropriate as a standard, but left it up to the legislature to devise a financing plan.
Franklin v Gwinnettgwyn – girl – title ix
First time that Title IX was used to protect students from harassment. Plaintiff is entitled to receive punitive damages when intentional action to avoid Title IX compliance is established
Thomas v AtascaderoAtascadero – Aids
expulsion of student based on HIV/AIDS violates Rehabilitation Act- section 504
Bethel v FraserFraser crane – vulgar, speech
Upheld school’s authority to punish students and prohibit use of vulgar, obscene and lewd speech in public
Mills V Board of EdMills – kid needs help, regardless of $
Children’s needs, not financial limits, must come first when it comes to providing educational services to students with disabilities
Honig v Doe
Disabled student can only be suspended for 10 days pending completion of expulsionary proceedings
Zellman v Simmons-Harris
School vouchers do not violate the establishment clause