8 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 48 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Robert Walczak and Karen Walczak v. Florida Union Free School District and Maureen Flaherty.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Robert Walczak and Karen Walczak v. Florida Union Free School District and Maureen Flaherty Anchor | green | “mindful that the judiciary generally lacks the specialized knowledge and experience necessary to resolve persistent and difficult questions of educational policy.” | 11 |
| 2 | Robert Walczak and Karen Walczak v. Florida Union Free School District and Maureen Flaherty | green | “while federal courts do not simply rubber stamp administrative decisions, they are expected to give due weight to these proceedings, mindful that the judiciary generally lacks the specialized knowledge and experience necessary to resolve persistent and difficult questions of edu…” | 9 |
| 3 | N.B. v. New York City Department of Education | green | “a school district meets its obligations to provide a fape by creating an iep that is developed in compliance with the idea's procedural and substantive requirements.” | 7 |
| 4 | P.C. v. Rye City School District | green | “(i) shall receive the records of the administrative proceedings; (ii) shall hear additional evidence at the request of a party; and (iii) basing its decision on the preponderance of the evidence, shall grant such relief as the court determines is appropriate.” | 6 |
| 5 | Mr. P v. W. Hartford Bd. of Educ. | green | “the idea requires states receiving federal funds to provide 'all children with disabilities' with a fape,” | 4 |
| 6 | T.M. ex rel. A.M. v. Cornwall Central School District | green | “this requirement expresses a strong preference for children with disabilities to be educated, to the maximum extent appropriate, together with their non-disabled peers.” | 4 |
| 7 | N.B. v. New York City Department of Education | green | “as to this latter requirement, the iep need not bring the child to grade-level achievement, but it must aspire to provide more than de minimis educational progress.” | 4 |
| 8 | Mr. P v. W. Hartford Bd. of Educ. | green | “reasonably calculated to enable the child to make progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.