L.B. Ex Rel. K.B. v. Nebo School District

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that, “although [the autistic child] had some behavioral problems such as tantruming,” she “was not disruptive in the regular classroom,” and, therefore, the negative effects factor “weighs in favor” of mainstreaming the child
• finding that the private placement was appropriate because the district “violated the IDEA by failing to provide [the student] with an LRE,” and the student “benefitted significantly, both academically and non-academically, from her private mainstream preschool”
• reviewing the decision of a district court that granted “a judgment on the administrative agency’s record” under IDEA and noting that summary dispositions under IDEA are often best described as judgments on the record
• not deciding whether costs should be taken into account since the issue was not presented in the case
• “[T]he district court conducted a bench trial on the administrative record which this court reviews de novo, applying the same IDEA standard that was employed by the district court.”
• “Although the district court may accept additional evidence, such evidence is merely supplemental to the administrative record.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).