The District will also provide training for students and faculty, and will survey the educational environment and effectiveness of measures taken pursuant to the Agreement. On July 31, 1969, the Court entered a decree setting forth a plan to desegregate the school district. Under this agreement, the school district agreed to take the following steps, among others, to: establish protocols for registration and identification; train faculty and intake staff concerning proper data entry for tracking; ensure timely, adequate and appropriate ELL services; provide translation services for parents and guardians, train ELL teachers, provide appropriate materials for ELL classes, ensure special education students are not denied appropriate ELL services, and monitor current and exited ELLs. The United States intervened in October 2000, alleging that the L'Anse Area Schools subjected Mr. Owen to religious harassment while he was employed by the school district. It will also help you retain more information for class since you have finished reading and briefing a case. Under the agreement, which the district court approved on April 11, 2002, Mr. Owen was paid $265,000. These reviews of the case-law are regularly updated and translated into other languages. Lastly, the court ordered MHSAA to submit a compliance plan to remedy the discriminatory scheduling of girls' sports. Lastly, the District will ensure that it communicates essential school-related information in a language that parents and guardians with limited English proficiency understand so that their children can access the District’s educational programs. Under the terms of the agreement, the University agreed to take significant steps including, among others: revising its notice of nondiscrimination and relevant sexual harassment policies, procedures, and practices; responding promptly, equitably, and adequately to known sexual harassment that has created a hostile environment; and training students and employees on University policies and federal laws pertaining to sexual harassment, how and to whom they can report allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation, the resources available and how to access them, and the University’s Title IX grievance procedures and potential outcomes. the main purpose of this type of brief is to convince and persuade the higher court to uphold or reverse the decision the court has made. The Constitution grants them that right." The plaintiffs alleged that this violated their rights to freedom of speech under the First Amendment, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, and their rights to equal protection under the laws pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment. On August 24, 2017, the Section and the district entered into an out-of-court settlement agreement outlining the steps that the district will take to resolve the issues identified by the United States and ensure compliance with Section 1703(f) of the EEOA. For more information, please see this press release. In the course of reviewing the West Carroll Parish school district's compliance with its desegregation orders, the Section identified zone jumping within the district and student transfers from outside of the district. On February 21, 2018, the United States and the Jackson County School Board filed a joint motion for declaration of partial unitary status and sought court approval of a stipulation governing faculty and staff recruitment, hiring, and promotion, and student discipline. In March 2002, the court conducted a fairness hearing and approved the settlement. The lawsuit was filed by the New York Civil Liberties Union on behalf of J.L., a 15-year-old student in the District. With the consent of the school district, the Section simultaneously filed a joint motion to declare the district partially unitary and approve a proposed stipulation with regard to several of the school district’s remaining desegregation obligations. This longstanding school desegregation case was initiated by the United States in 1970. He did not return to East after the assault and finished high school on homebound studies. The board filed an opposition, and the United States filed a reply. The United States alleged that the school district failed to take effective measures to remedy the harassment and to keep it from recurring despite Mr. Owen's repeated complaints. As it pertains to transportation, the Superseding Consent Order restates the February 2016 consent order regarding transportation that required the District to desegregate one-race buses to the extent practicable. The court also ordered Meriwether to offer the same courses above the core curriculum at both Manchester and Greenville High Schools. Beneath the title of each case summary below are links that connect to lists of similar cases sorted by topic areas relevant to each case by protected class. 19. A modified settlement agreement designed to address the District's non-compliance with the parties' original settlement agreement was executed on October 14, 2014. This case involves Limited English Proficient (LEP) parents of students with disabilities who allege that the Philadelphia School District intentionally discriminates against them based on national origin by not providing complete and timely translations and interpretations of special education and regular education documents. In this section of the case brief, the parties involved and the process and hearing that happened in the lower courts are summarized. In this matter involving the Wicomico County Public School District in Maryland, the Section conducted an investigation into complaints that the District’s student discipline policies resulted in the discriminatory suspension of black and Latino students and students with disabilities, in violation of Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. Based on its review of the district, the Section raised concerns about, among other things: the school district's procedures for screening new students to determine whether they are ELLs; the opportunities that ELLs have to integrate with native speakers of English in a school setting; the extent to which the district's school libraries and media centers are accessible to ELLs; and the academic support provided by the district to ELLs who enroll in general education classes. In 2012, after extensive negotiations, the parties jointly submitted the USP, a four-year plan requiring the District to undertake a robust set of measures to desegregate its schools. Subsequently, the SDHSAA moved for summary judgment on the issue of whether the association was subject to Title IX and whether it is a state actor for purposes of 42 U.S.C. The Section initiated its investigation in response to a complaint by a group of parents alleging that their children had been subject to severe and pervasive sex-based harassment, including assault, that went unaddressed by the District. Not only that, it is also very useful in preparing course outlines and for exams. The United States and the Private Plaintiffs then monitored SFUSD's implementation of the 2008 Master Plan through the District's annual reports, regular site visits, community meetings, and communications with parents and students. The complaints alleged that other students repeatedly called Muslim students “terrorists,” pulled off their hijabs, and physically assaulted them, and told a Latina student to “Go back to Mexico,” threatened to kill her, and physically assaulted her. On May 2, the Departments of Justice and Education entered into a, In this matter involving the Arlington Public Schools (“the District”), the Section and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia examined whether the District was properly identifying and placing its English Learner (“EL”) students into language programs and adequately serving its secondary EL students, as required by Section 1703(f) of the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 (“EEOA”). The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. On January 23, 2017, the court granted the parties’ motion, declaring that the school district had achieved partial unitary status with respect to student assignment between schools, transportation, facilities, and extracurricular activities. In fact even summary a case can be difficult and requires a lot of time and understanding. On September 21, 2106, the Division reached a settlement agreement with the College to address these areas and bring it into compliance. On November 9, 2006, the court approved a consent decree that obliges the district to take measures in the areas of student attendance and assignment, facilities, employee assignment, and student transfers. The number of black students classified as gifted also has increased. elementary v. middle v. high school). The United States also raised concerns that the district had not investigated witness statements that the student had been called a "terrorist" and that there was a history of fellow students targeting him because of his turban. Unlike in the past, there is now no limit on the number of excused absences a student may receive for religious observance. Pursuant to Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the Departments of Justice and Education conducted an extensive investigation into sex-based harassment in the district's middle and high schools. The settlement also required reevaluation of certain categories of minority students who had been identified as MR. As a result, several hundred students who had been inappropriately placed as MR were exited from special education. On June 3, 2003, the Section filed an amicus brief in opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment. Following the completion of the facilities assessment and further negotiations, the parties reached agreement about student assignment, transfers, and facilities. In connection to the purposes of a case brief, it is more helpful to frame the issue more narrowly, broadly or specifically than how the court stated it. The Department also filed a motion to dismiss the Hoffman lawsuit on procedural grounds that the district court held in abeyance until after the hearing on the motion for a preliminary injunction. On May 5, 2006, Junior Does filed a complaint against the Allentown School District alleging that, as six- and seven-year-old students, they were sexually assaulted by another student in the bathrooms at Central Elementary School during the 2003-2004 school year. In 1972, the League of United Latin American Citizens (“LULAC”) and GI Forum were allowed to intervene in the desegregation case as representatives of Mexican Americans in Texas. We also evaluated whether the District discriminated against Native American parents by failing to ensure meaningful access to the information surrounding the aforementioned programs and courses. See press release. The United States argued that the district’s practice of charging religious groups a fee to use school facilities for activities serving local youth when the district does not charge secular groups a fee to use facilities serving local youth violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments because the fee discriminated against CEF’s religious viewpoint. On the other hand, the sectionÂ that contains the information that enables lawyers to quickly find the case opinion in published or online sources is called the citation. In this longstanding desegregation case, January 7, 2009, the Court entered a consent decree negotiated by the parties finds the district unitary in all areas except student assignment and quality of education. The court held that MHSAA is subject to Title IX and is a state actor for purposes of 42 U.S.C. This school and all others in the district are now subject to the 2013 agreement, which requires the district to report to the Section on the agreement's implementation through 2016. United States & Ridley v. State of Georgia (Meriwether Co. Bd. The agreement also requires JPPSS to review and revise its policies and practices for communicating with national origin essential parents who have limited English proficiency to make sure that parents receive important information in a language they can understand. The court found that the district had failed to eliminate the vestiges of discrimination to the extent practicable and ordered that the trial set for February 26, 2007, proceed to consider an appropriate student assignment plan. The Parties also agreed to continue to work collaboratively to resolve the United States' remaining concerns regarding the district's anti-harassment policies, procedures, and practices, and to ensure that district students and employees had appropriate training and guidelines on their federal civil rights and obligations as they pertain to harassment based on religion and national origin. The consent order modified the School Board's student assignment plan by establishing zone lines for a new elementary school and implementing a voluntary majority-to-minority ("M-to-M") transfer program that furthers desegregation in the district. In this matter involving the Crestwood School District in Dearborn Heights, Michigan, the Department investigated a complaint alleging violations of the Equal Educational Opportunities Act, 20 U.S.C. The order requires the district to take additional steps to reach full compliance, including adopting measures to promote racial diversity in its faculty and staff, expanding its use of positive behavioral supports and interventions throughout its schools, and revising its student discipline policies and procedures to ensure they are fair, non-discriminatory, and limit the use of exclusionary discipline such as suspensions and expulsions. In October 2003, the student, through her father, sued the school district for alleged violations of her constitutional rights and Oklahoma law. It employs a “Socratic” or case method of teaching when students prepare for classes. An appellate brief is written legal document which is presented to an appellate court. The parties filed briefs requesting court approval of a second amended consent approving the parties’ settlement with slight modifications. The 2018 agreement requires the District to: provide adequate language services to all EL students; provide EL students with appropriate access to core content through sheltered instruction; adequately train the administrators and teachers who provide language services and implement the EL program, including on how to use its curricula for EL students; adequately monitor the academic performance of current and former EL students; and properly evaluate the effectiveness of the EL program over time. Enter into an agreement with the law enforcement agencies that provide School Resource Officers to the district that makes clear that Officers will not become involved in enforcing school discipline rules, prevents students from being arrested for minor misconduct and requires the Officer to provide a report to the District any time the Officer becomes involved in an incident at a school. Having provided the public appropriate notice and an opportunity to submit comments pursuant to a court-approved schedule, the United States and the school district filed a Joint Motion and Memorandum of Support on December 14, 2018, to declare the District partially unitary with respect to desegregation of staff and the following quality of education areas governed by the 2003 Order: academic achievement, advanced course offerings and enrollment, special education program, and student dropouts. The United States objected to the district’s motion. This case involves religious harassment by students against a Jewish public school teacher in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The Department of Justice will continue to monitor the District’s compliance with the Court’s orders and federal law. Specifically, the Section alleged in our complaint-in-intervention : from the eighth grade through the eleventh grade, Jeremy Lovins was subjected to harassment on the basis of sex (ostensibly because other students believed he was gay); Jeremy and his parents repeatedly informed school officials of the harassment but the harassment continued; and Jeremy was eventually subjected to an assault and forced to leave school because of the harassment. What Is a Law Case Summary? After conducting numerous interviews and an extensive review of the College’s policies, grievance procedures, investigative practices, training, student education efforts, and responses to reports of sexual assault, sexual harassment, and retaliation, the Division identified areas where the College needed to take further steps to ensure compliance with Title IX and its regulations. The June 16, 2009 complaint alleges that FHSAA’s new policy discriminates against female students by reducing the maximum number of competitions that a school can schedule by 20% for varsity teams and 40% for sub-varsity teams while exempting 36,000 boys who play football and only 4,300 girls and 201 boys who participate in competitive cheerleading. Pursuant to the court’s instructions, the United States filed a motion to join Laurens as a necessary defendant and a supplemental complaint against Laurens. On July 14, 2014, the Division filed a Statement of Interest in D.J. The parties presented the transfer policy as part of a consent decree that was submitted to the federal district court for its consideration and approval. In this matter involving the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE), the Section conducted a review to determine whether ISBE was providing appropriate guidance and monitoring of school districts' services to English Language Learner ("ELL") students as required by the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 (EEOA). An official website of the United States government. For instance, if you are reading a case on contract law you can simply ignore the constitutional or evidence law aspect of that case without even mentioning it in your case brief. Following DOJ's and OCR's investigation, UCSD voluntarily entered into a resolution agreement with the departments. At the same time, two groups moved to intervene in the case for the purpose of opposing the consent decree. On October 22, 1976, the parties entered into a Consent Decree that incorporated a Master Plan that requires bilingual-bicultural education for the English Language Learner (ELL) students who speak Chinese, Filipino, and Spanish. km. Â§ 1681. For more details about the settlement, please see the press release linked here. No. The defendants appealed the denials of their motions to dismiss, and the Appellate Section defended the IDEA's constitutionality on appeal. The district also will retain a qualified consultant to help it draft a comprehensive recruitment and hiring policy and implement best practices for recruiting, hiring, and retaining a qualified and diverse faculty and staff. The United States filed an opposition to the district's motion on January 12, 2007, and a reply in support of its own motion on January 26, 2007. On April 6, 2014, the district filed a motion for a declaration of full unitary status, which the United States opposed on June 3, 2014. The school district achieved partial unitary status in certain areas in 2002 and additional areas in 2018. In February, 2015, the United States and the district entered into a settlement agreement to resolve the district's noncompliance with federal law. The court subsequently declared the school district partially unitary status in the areas of transportation (March 9, 2012), faculty and staff assignment (Sept. 2, 2012), and extracurricular activities (Dec. 14, 2012). On August 13, 2014, the Department and the district entered into a comprehensive, multi-part Settlement Agreement. This longstanding desegregation case was filed by the United States in 1970. The Section worked cooperatively with Virginia to resolve its concerns arising from information contained in the reports, and, as a result, the parties signed and the court entered a Joint Motion for Dismissal on December 6, 2001. trapezium shaped area around Taj Mahal covering five districts in the region of Agra. This statewide settlement resolved issues relating to the overrepresentation of black students in the mental retardation and emotional disturbance special education classifications and the underrepresentation of black students in the specific learning disabilities and gifted and talented special education classifications. 100,000+ Designs, Documents Templates in PDF, Word, Excel, PSD, Google Docs, PowerPoint, InDesign, Apple Pages, Google Sheets, Publisher, Apple Numbers, Illustrator, Keynote. One of the K-12 schools to be closed had a virtually all-white student body and had never graduated a black student. As part of the consent order, the district will be required to: The court will retain jurisdiction over the consent order during its implementation, which is expected to last three years, and the Justice Department will monitor the district’s compliance. In their briefs responding to the motion for further relief, the state defendants claimed immunity from suit under the Eleventh Amendment and argued that the EEOA failed to validly abrogate this immunity. Court: Madras High Court. The analysis will be structured in essay format. The consent decree requires the district to implement comprehensive measures to ensure that ELLs have equal opportunities to succeed academically in district educational programs, starting with the proper identification of ELL students when they enter DPS. More specifically, the student contended the school district failed to take adequate steps to protect him from an ongoing campaign of sexual harassment by his peers. The Hoffman plaintiffs also filed a motion for preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin the season switch immediately. This order called for the reconfiguration of attendance zone lines for Askewville, an independent facilities assessment of the elementary and middle schools in the district, and the development of a new student assignment plan. Among other things, the agreement requires the School to: provide all EL students – who make up nearly a quarter of the School’s population – with an adequate amount of daily English as a Second Language (ESL) instruction taught by an ESL-certified teacher; actively recruit qualified, certified staff for ESL, core content area, and special education teaching positions; ensure all ELs with disabilities receive both ESL and special education services unless their parents/guardians voluntarily and knowingly waive one or both services; train special education and ESL-certified teachers who work with EL students with disabilities on how to provide services to ELs with disabilities; communicate with Limited English Proficient parents about essential school information in a language they understand; and properly monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of its EL program over time. The consent order requires the district to close four of its seven elementary schools, including three racially identifiable schools; construct a new school; modify its attendance zones; and implement a controlled choice program at two of its elementary schools. On February 28, 2014, the court declared that LISD was partially unitary and had eliminated all vestiges of past de jure discrimination to the extent practicable in its facilities, transportation, extracurricular activities, and staff assignment. For a longer case, it is always a good idea to read a summary of the case first either from the case notes itself or from other web resources, if available. EL students comprise approximately 46% of the District’s student population. The Section's investigation of the complaint revealed that the student had been subjected to significant harassment based on race and retaliation for reporting the harassment of which the District knew or should have known. Pursuant to a Fifth Circuit Decision, dated July 13, 1979, the public laboratory schools at Grambling State University and Louisiana Tech University were added to the case. The court will retain jurisdiction over the consent order during its implementation, and the Justice Department will monitor the district’s compliance. The court also approved the parties’ stipulation regarding faculty and staff recruitment, hiring, and promotion, and student discipline and will retain jurisdiction over these areas. The Court granted the United States' motion on February 26, 2003. After a student missed more than one day for religious worship, the District’s attendance policy stated that the student would be given an unexcused absence and subjected to various sanctions including loss of academic credit, inability to make up work, and suspension. In this matter involving the Stamford Public School District, the Section and the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut (“USAO”) conducted a comprehensive review to determine whether the district was providing appropriate services to English Language Learner (“ELL”) students as required by the Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974 (EEOA), 20 U.S.C. We encourage you to double check our case summaries by reading the entire case.