K.S. v. District of Columbia

How courts have described this case

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

• with respect to judicial review of an HOD, “the burden of proof is always on the party challenging the administrative determination!;.]”
• “Academic progress under a prior plan may be relevant in determining the appropriateness of a challenged IEP.”
• “Academic progress under a prior plan may be relevant in determining the appropriateness of a challenged IEP.”
• A hearing officer need not always explain “why he was discounting the testimony of [a party’s] experts” if “he otherwise provided substantial justification” for his decision.
• “The preponderance-of-the-evidenee standard of review ‘does not authorize unfettered de novo review.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).