Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 620 F.3d 1090 - Mark H. v. Hamamoto

Mark H. v. Hamamoto’s Empirical Analysis

620 F.3d 1090 · 2010

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
September 2021
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 20 U.S.C. § 1414 · 20 U.S.C. § 7801 · 29 U.S.C. § 794

Relies on Alexander v. Choate · US Airways, Inc. v. Barnett · Lovell v. Chandler · Vinson v. Thomas · Delta Savings Bank v. United States

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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “acted with deliberate indifference if it (1) “[had] knowledge that a harm to a federally protected right is substantially likely,” and (2) “fail[ed] to act upon that likelihood.” Lovell v. Chandler, 303 F.3d 1039, 1056 (9th Cir.2002). Hawaii DOE had knowledge that a harm to a federally protected right was substantially likely if Hawaii DOE knew that Michelle and Natalie needed accommodation of autism-specific services. See id. Hawaii DOE failed to act upon that likelihood if it failed to adequately investigate whether those autism-specific services were a reasonable accommodation. See id.; Duvall, 260 F.3d at 1139-40 . Thus, Hawaii DOE acted with deliberate indifference if it knew that Michelle and Natalie needed autism-specific services in order to enjoy meaningful access to the benefits of a public education and failed to investigate whether those services were available as a reasonable accommodation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “No otherwise qualified individual with a disability ... shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance or under any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “8. During the relevant years of 1994-1998, the Hawaii DOE failed to provide Natalie or Michelle a reasonable accommodation that they needed to enjoy meaningful access to the benefits of a public education.”
    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.