Schaffer Ex Rel. Schaffer v. Weast

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting additional evidence and “treating such evidence cautiously”
• “Judicial review of IEPs under the IDEA is meant to be largely prospective and to focus on a child’s needs looking forward.”
• “[T]his type of post-hearing evidence still risks diminishing the role of administrative proceedings under the IDEA.”
• in discussing the introduction of post-hearing evidence, noting that perpetual litigation “would force school districts to divert scarce resources to the already substantial costs of IDEA litigation”
• “Judicial review of IEPs under the IDEA is meant to be largely prospective and to focus on a child's needs looking forward; courts thus ask whether, at the time an IEP was created, it was reasonably calculated to enable the child to receive educational benefits.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).