Rose v. Yeaw

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that retaliation claims were related to the evaluation and educational placement of a student and, thus, had to be exhausted
• holding that retaliation claims were related to the evaluation and educational placement of a student and, thus, had to be exhausted
• claims that school retaliated against student in response to 10 parents’ efforts to enforce educational rights “relate unmistakably to the evaluation and educational placement” of student
• “[The IDEA exhaustion requirement] applies even when the suit is brought pursuant to a different statute so long as the party is seeking relief that is available under- subchapter II of IDEA.”
• irreparable harm exception not established where the plaintiffs failed to provide evidence that their disabled son would have “experienced severe harm” or “irreversible damage” to his health or education while exhausting administrative remedies
• “A plaintiff does not have to exhaust administrative remedies if [they] can show that that the agency’s adoption of an unlawful general policy would make resort to the agency futile, or that the administrative Civil No. 18-1622(RAM

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).