Parents' Choice Tennessee v. Jason Golden, in his Official Capacity as Superintendent of Williamson County Schools
Syllabus
Parents, on behalf of their children who are public school students, and an education-focused parents' rights organization brought suit against the Williamson County Board of Education, arguing that the Board's adoption and implementation of a particular curriculum violates Tennessee law. The Plaintiffs argue the curriculum violates a state law restricting the use of Common Core textbooks and instructional materials in public schools and violates another state law that bars the teaching of certain prohibited concepts in public schools. The School Board moved to dismiss. The trial court granted the motion on two justiciability grounds. The trial court concluded that the parents and the parents' rights organization lacked standing to maintain either claim. The trial court also concluded that the Plaintiffs were required to exhaust administrative remedies with regard to their prohibited concepts claim and had not done so. The Plaintiffs appealed. With the exception of a family that left the county public school system and has not expressed in their pleadings an intent to return, we conclude that trial court erred in finding the Plaintiffs lacked standing. We affirm the trial court's dismissal of the prohibited concepts claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We reverse, however, the dismissal of the Plaintiffs' Common Core claim and remand for further proceedings.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- finding that the General Aviation Revitalization Act’s eighteen-year statute of repose gives rise to “the right to be free from the burdens of trial”
- “It is clear that an essential aspect of the GARA statute of repose is the right to be free from the burdens of trial.”
- “GARA ... creates an explicit statutory right not to stand trial which would be irretrievably lost should [the defendant] be forced to defend itself in a full trial.”
- “It is well-established that interlocutory appeals are not available to address statute of limitations issues because a statute of limitations does not give rise to a right not to stand trial, but rather creates a safeguard against unfair 2 verdicts from delinquent suits.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.