34 C.F.R. § 104.61
Procedures
The procedural provisions applicable to title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 apply to this part. These procedures are found in §§ 100.6-100.10 and part 101 of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2021 · leading case: Barker v. Riverside Cnty. Off. of Educ., 584 F.3d 821 (9th Cir. 2009).
Barker v. Riverside Cnty. Off. of Educ., 584 F.3d 821 (9th Cir. 2009). “This regulation applies to all rights secured by the Rehabilitation Act pursuant to 34 C.F.R. § 104.61 . In other words, the anti-retaliation provision in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act has been incorporated by the Rehabilitation Act so as to extend the Rehabilitation Act’s…”
Cain v. Esthetique, 182 F. Supp. 3d 54 (S.D.N.Y. 2016). “See 34 C.F.R. § 104.61 (applying §§ 100.6-100.”
Rafferty v. Cranston Pub. Sch. Comm., 315 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2002). “'” 34 C.F.R. section 104.61 *28 (1999); Weber, 212 F.”
Susan N. David N., Individually & as Parents & Nat. Guardians to M.N. A Minor v. Wilson Sch. Dist., 70 F.3d 751 (3rd Cir. 1995). “The IDEA authorizes federal reviews of state and local compliance, see 34 C.F.R. §§ 104.61 , 100.7, and affords certain procedural safeguards to the parents of disabled children.”
Alston v. Dist. of Columbia, 561 F. Supp. 2d 29 (D.D.C. 2008). “See 34 C.F.R. § 104.61 . 18 . The defendants, in one sentence in their reply, suggest that the court should also dismiss claims against the District.”
Susquenita Sch. Dist. v. Raelee S., by & Through Her Parents & Next Friends, Heidi S. & Byron S, 96 F.3d 78 (3rd Cir. 1996). “State and local compliance with the IDEA is monitored by federal review, see 34 C.F.R. §§ 104.61 ,100.7, and by procedural safeguards extended to handicapped children and their parents.”
MMR-Z. Ex Rel. Ramirez-Senda v. Puerto Rico, 528 F.3d 9 (1st Cir. 2008). “§ 794a(a)(2); 34 C.F.R. § 104.61 (incorporating Title Vi’s retaliation provision into the Rehabilitation Act); Jackson v.”
C.M. v. Bd. of Educ. of Union Cnty. Reg'l High Sch. Dist., 128 F. App'x 876 (3rd Cir. 2005). “6 (c); 34 C.F.R. § 104.61 . Disclosures to the OCR were thus clearly authorized under 20 U.”
I.K. Ex Rel. E.K. v. Sylvan Union Sch. Dist., 681 F. Supp. 2d 1179 (E.D. Cal. 2010). “34 C.F.R. § 104.61 prohibits school districts from intimidating, coercing, or retaliating against individuals because they engage in activities protected by Section 504.”
Lillbask Ex Rel. Mauclaire v. Sergi, 193 F. Supp. 2d 503 (D. Conn. 2002). “She sues under § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and for violation of 34 C.F.R. Part 104.61. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.”
Nicholas Marlow v. United States Dep't of Educ. & William Bennett, Sec'y of Educ., 820 F.2d 581 (2d Cir. 1987). “See 34 C.F.R. § 104.61 (adopting for section 504 the enforcement procedures of Title VI contained in 34 C.”
W.B. v. Matula, 67 F.3d 484 (3rd Cir. 1995). “In addition to authorizing federal reviews of state and local compliance with IDEA, see 34 C.F.R. §§ 104.61 , 100.7, IDEA’S provisions are enforced by affording certain procedural safeguards to parents.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.