Ortega v. Bibb County School District’s Empirical Analysis
397 F.3d 1321 · 2005
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975) · 20 U.S.C. § 1401 · 20 U.S.C. § 1411 · 20 U.S.C. § 1414 · 20 U.S.C. § 1415 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 29 U.S.C. § 791 · 42 U.S.C. § 12101 (§ 2 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990)
Relies on Alexander v. Sandoval · Osborn v. President Directors and Company of the Bank of the United States · Nieves-Márquez v. Puerto Rico · Polera v. Board of Education of the Newburgh Enlarged City School District · Charlie Neil v. Board of Education of Skokie School District
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he structure of the statute — with its elaborate provision for educational services and payments to those who deliver them — is inconsistent with monetary awards to children and parents.... [W]e conclude that damages are not relief that is available under the IDEA. This is the norm for social-welfare programs that specify benefits in kind at public expense, whether medical care or housing or, under the IDEA, education.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a]lthough the IDEA is silent about the availability of tort-like damages, tort-like damages are simply inconsistent with the IDEA's statutory scheme.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.