Logourl black
From our private database of 14,200+ case briefs...

Board of Education v. Rowley

United States Supreme Court
458 U.S. 176 (1982)


Facts

Amy Rowley (plaintiff) was a deaf student at the Furnace Woods School (the school) (defendant). Rowley was an excellent lip reader who had minimal residual hearing. During her kindergarten year, Rowley was provided with an FM hearing aid that amplified words spoken into a receiver, the principal’s office was equipped with a teletype machine to communicate with Rowley’s parents, and the school administration took a course in sign-language interpretation. Rowley successfully completed her kindergarten year and performed better than average. During her first-grade year, an individualized education plan (IEP) was developed for Rowley. The IEP provided that Rowley would continue to have the FM hearing aid and would receive instruction from a tutor for the deaf and services from a speech therapist. With these supports, Rowley was placed into the regular classroom at the school. Rowley’s parents objected to the IEP and requested a sign-language interpreter in place of the FM hearing aid. The school consulted with the Committee on the Handicapped, which heard from Rowley’s parents and teachers and visited a class for the deaf. The school rejected Rowley’s parents’ request for an interpreter. Rowley’s parents appealed that decision to an independent examiner, who agreed with the school. That decision was affirmed by the New York Commissioner of Education. Rowley’s parents then sought review of that decision in district court. The district court determined that the school was required to provide Rowley with an opportunity to achieve her full potential, which meant the school had to provide a sign-language interpreter. The school appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which affirmed. The school then petitioned the United States Supreme Court for review.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, J.)

Concurrence (Blackmun, J.)

Dissent (White, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 250,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.