Oscar v. Alaska Department of Education & Early Development

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that dismissal without prejudice did not confer prevailing party status on defendant in Individuals with Disabilities Education Act action
• holding that the “dismissal without prejudice did not confer prevailing party status upon the defendant” un- der 20 U.S.C. § 1415
• holding that dismissal without prejudice did not confer 4 prevailing party status upon the defendant when the dismissal is based on a procedural defect, i.e., 5 plaintiff administrative complaint was not signed, rather than on the merits
• holding “dismissal 21 without prejudice did not confer prevailing party status upon the defendant” under the 22 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
• holding defendant was not a prevailing party, because defendant “remains at risk that Oscar will re-file his IDEA claim in federal court”
• holding defendant was not a prevailing party, because defendant “remains at risk that Oscar will re-file his IDEA claim in federal court”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).