specifically designed instruction (California) · Go Syfert
← California issues

specifically designed instruction in California

6 California opinions name it 1 courts 2005–2024 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
In Re Carl R.green
calctapp · 2005 · cited in 3 California opinions naming this issue, 2009–2016
2 sentences

2016(See § 241.1, subd. (e).) 4 An individualized education plan (IEP) “is a comprehensive statement of a disabled child’s educational needs and the specifically designed instruction and related services that will meet those needs. [Citation.] It is developed by a school official qualified in special education, the child’s teacher, and the parents. [Citation.]” (In re Carl R. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1051, 1067 , fn. omitted.) “[A]n IEP is reviewed at least annually and revised as necessary.” (Ibid., citing 20 U.S.C. § 1414 (d)(4).) 3 602, and retained “dual status” jurisdiction with DCFS as the lea

2009However, parents may disregard the IEP and educate their child in a manner different from that specified by the IEP. [Citations.]" ( In re Carl R. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1051, 1067 [ 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 612 ], fn. omitted.) "[A]n IEP is reviewed at least annually and revised as necessary." ( Ibid., citing 20 U.S.C. § 1414 (d)(4).) [2] "`A[ssembly] B[ill No.] 3632' refers to the adoption of what is now chapter 26.5 of division 7 of title I of the Government Code, section 7570 et seq., entitled `Interagency Responsibilities for Providing Services to Children With Disabilities.'" ( Grossmont Union Hig

23
Grossmont Union High School District v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONgreen
calctapp · 2008 · cited in 2 California opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009However, parents may disregard the IEP and educate their child in a manner different from that specified by the IEP. [Citations.]" ( In re Carl R. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1051, 1067 [ 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 612 ], fn. omitted.) "[A]n IEP is reviewed at least annually and revised as necessary." ( Ibid., citing 20 U.S.C. § 1414 (d)(4).) [2] "`A[ssembly] B[ill No.] 3632' refers to the adoption of what is now chapter 26.5 of division 7 of title I of the Government Code, section 7570 et seq., entitled `Interagency Responsibilities for Providing Services to Children With Disabilities.'" ( Grossmont Union Hig

2009However, parents may disregard the IEP and educate their child in a manner different from that specified by the IEP. [Citations.]" ( In re Carl R. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1051, 1067 [ 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 612 ], fn. omitted.) "[A]n IEP is reviewed at least annually and revised as necessary." ( Ibid., citing 20 U.S.C. § 1414 (d)(4).) [2] "`A[ssembly] B[ill No.] 3632' refers to the adoption of what is now chapter 26.5 of division 7 of title I of the Government Code, section 7570 et seq., entitled `Interagency Responsibilities for Providing Services to Children With Disabilities.'" ( Grossmont Union Hig

22
School Committee of the Town of Burlington v. Department of Educationgreen
scotus · 1985 · cited in 2 California opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005
2 sentences

2005An IEP is a comprehensive statement of a disabled child's educational needs and the specifically designed instruction and related services that will meet those needs. ( Burlington, supra, 471 U.S. at p. 368 , 105 S.Ct. 1996 .) It is developed by a school official qualified in special education, the child's teacher, and the parents. ( Ibid. ) It guides the school system as to how the child will be educated.

2005An IEP is a comprehensive statement of a disabled child's educational needs and the specifically designed instruction and related services that will meet those needs. ( Burlington, supra, 471 U.S. at p. 368 , 105 S.Ct. 1996 .) It is developed by a school official qualified in special education, the child's teacher, and the parents. ( Ibid. ) It guides the school system as to how the child will be educated.

12
Orange County Social Services Agency v. M.C.green
calctapp · 2014 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
2 sentences

2024(See In re Stephanie M., supra, 7 Cal.4th at pp. 318-319 [where the child had “special needs,” the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in “placing special weight on the child’s need for stability”]; In re J.C., supra, 226 Cal.App.4th at p. 526 [where the child had “a loving and stable placement” for most of her life, the mother failed to show how her child’s “best interests in permanency and stability would be furthered by the proposed modification”].) Monique argues that she had difficulty attending the boys’ appointments because she lived far from the service providers and that, if s

2024(See In re Stephanie M., supra, 7 Cal.4th at pp. 318-319 [where the child had “special needs,” the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in “placing special weight on the child’s need for stability”]; In re J.C., supra, 226 Cal.App.4th at p. 526 [where the child had “a loving and stable placement” for most of her life, the mother failed to show how her child’s “best interests in permanency and stability would be furthered by the proposed modification”].) Monique argues that she had difficulty attending the boys’ appointments because she lived far from the service providers and that, if s

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
In Re RW green
calctapp · 2009
1 sentence

2024At best, Monique presented an uncertain future for her boys, in 6 “‘An IEP is a comprehensive statement of a disabled child’s educational needs and the specifically designed instruction and related services that will meet those needs. [Citation.] It is developed by a school official qualified in special education, the child’s teacher, and the parents. [Citation.] It guides the school system as to how the child will be educated.’” (In re R.W. (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 1268 , 1270, fn. 1.) 14 contrast to the certainty and guaranteed access to services that their current placement gave them.

12024–2024
Florence County School District Four v. Carter Ex Rel. Carter green
scotus · 1993
2 sentences

2005However, parents may disregard the IEP and educate their child in a manner different from that specified by the IEP. [10] ( Burlington, supra, 471 U. S. at pp. 373-374, 105 S.Ct. 1996 ; Florence County School District Four v. Carter, supra, 510 U.S. at p. 13 , 114 S.Ct. 361 ; 34 C.F.R. § 300.403 .) Thus, the M. family may disregard the current IEP.

2005However, parents may disregard the IEP and educate their child in a manner different from that specified by the IEP. [10] ( Burlington, supra, 471 U. S. at pp. 373-374, 105 S.Ct. 1996 ; Florence County School District Four v. Carter, supra, 510 U.S. at p. 13 , 114 S.Ct. 361 ; 34 C.F.R. § 300.403 .) Thus, the M. family may disregard the current IEP.

12005–2005

Statutes the citing opinions construe

USC § 20u.s.c.1414 (5)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check