Marie O. v. Edgar
United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
No. 94 C 1471, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1070 (1996)
- Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD
Facts
Part H was a federal program created under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that incentivized states to develop and implement a statewide system to provide early-intervention services to developmentally delayed infants and toddlers. Part H laid out extensive and specific requirements for participation, including particular demographics that needed to be served in particular ways and a list of systems that needed to be implemented. Federal funding was conditioned each year on compliance with Part H requirements. The law also explicitly stated that after five years, a state had to have, at a minimum, certain programs established to serve all eligible children. The State of Illinois (state) (defendant) opted into the Part H program and began receiving federal funding. However, due to funding difficulties and a lack of qualified personnel, the state fell significantly behind on its requirements. The state continued to receive funds past its fifth year of participation in the program. After eight years in the program, the state did not have the required systems in place and had roughly 26,000 eligible children who were not receiving the early-intervention services guaranteed under Part H. A lawsuit was filed on behalf of a class of developmentally delayed infants and toddlers (children) (plaintiffs), and the children filed for summary judgment, alleging a violation of the IDEA.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kocoras, 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.