Johnson v. Bos. Pub. Sch.’s Empirical Analysis
906 F.3d 182 · 2018
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975) · 20 U.S.C. § 1401 · 20 U.S.C. § 1412 · 20 U.S.C. § 1414 · 20 U.S.C. § 1415 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Federal Trade Commission v. Cement Institute · Roland M. v. Concord School Committee · Endrew F. v. Douglas County School Dist. RE–1 · D.B. ex rel. Elizabeth B. v. Esposito · Lessard v. Wilton-Lyndeborough Cooperative 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“we employ a degree-of-deference continuum, providing non-deferential plenary review for law-dominated questions and deferential review for fact-dominated questions.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“psychological services . . . as may be required to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“dictated by Endrew F. " 6 Id. at 194-95 . C.D.'s parents say that our Johnson decision restricted its view to Endrew F. 's language about "progress appropriate in light of the child's circumstances,”
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.