KM v. Tustin Unified School District
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
725 F.3d 1088 (2013)
- Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD
Facts
KM and DH (students) (plaintiffs) were hearing-disabled students in the Tustin Unified School District and the Poway Unified School District (districts) (defendants), respectively. The students requested that their districts provide Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART), a transcription service that provided real-time captioning, in classrooms. The districts denied the requests but provided other accommodations. The students requested administrative hearings to review the denials, but the districts prevailed. The students filed suits in federal district court, alleging violations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and arguing that the districts did not meet the IDEA’s free appropriate public education (FAPE) requirement or the effective-communication requirement of Title II’s implementing regulations. The court found that the districts fully complied with the IDEA and that because the students’ IDEA FAPE claims failed, the ADA claims failed as well. The court reasoned that if a school satisfied the IDEA’s FAPE requirement, it satisfied the similar FAPE requirement of § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. The court further extrapolated that because courts have found that § 504 and Title II of the ADA are substantively similar statutes, a school that satisfies the IDEA also satisfies Title II. The students appealed to the Ninth Circuit, which consolidated the cases.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Berzon, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.