Hoeft v. Tucson Unified School District

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “States are given the power to place themselves in compliance with the [IDEA] . . . . Federal courts—generalists with no experience in the educational needs of handicapped students—are given the benefit of expert factfinding by a state agency devoted to this very purpose.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Paul G. v. Monterey Peninsula U.S.D.
  Ninth Circuit· 2019-08-12· cited 30×
• S.B. v. Cal. Dep't of Educ.
  E.D. California· 2018-08-27· cited 30×
• DL v. District of Columbia
  District of Columbia· 2006-08-25· cited 28×
• Moubry ex rel. Moubry v. Independent School District Number 696
  D. Minnesota· 1996-05-13· cited 11×
• Lemon v. District of Columbia
  District of Columbia· 1996-03-27· cited 6×
• Iascone v. Conejo Valley Unified School District
  Ninth Circuit· 2001-02-14· cited 4×
• Upper Valley Ass'n for Handicapped Citizens v. Mills
  D. Vermont· 1996-05-01· cited 3×
• Wyner ex rel. Wyner v. Manhattan Beach Unified School District
  Ninth Circuit· 2000-09-08· cited 1×
• Mary Hoeft v. Tucson Unified School District
  Ninth Circuit· 1992-06-17
• Wyner v. Manhattan Beach Unified School District
  Ninth Circuit· 2000-09-08
• UPPER VALLEY ASS'N FOR HANDICAPPED v. Mills
  D. Vermont· 1996-05-01
• J.M. v. New York City Dept. of Ed.
  Second Circuit· 2025-12-09