Recent Cases

Resources

• Bonner v. Daniels, No. 49A02-0702-CV-188 (Ind. App. May 2, 2008) [HTML 3,751kb]
  The Indiana Court of Appeals has ruled that a suit brought against the executive branch of the state government challenging the adequacy of state’s formula for funding public schools is justiciable and that the education clause of the state constitution provides a judicially enforceable right to a public education.
  
• P.A.C.E. v. Kansas City Mo. Sch. Dist., No. 06-3318 (Feb. 27, 2008) [HTML 3,971kb]
  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (AR, IA, MN, MO, ND, NE, SD) has struck down a Missouri law requiring the Kansas City Missouri School District (KCMSD) to use property tax revenue that was set aside to pay off court-ordered desegregation bonds to fund charter schools.
  
• Beaufort County Bd. of Educ. v. Beaufort County Bd. of Commissioners, No. 06-956 (N.C. App. Feb. 5, 2008) [HTML 3,169kb]
  The North Carolina Court of Appeals has upheld a jury verdict awarding the Beaufort County Board of Education (BCBOE) over $10 million in funds from the Beaufort County Board of Commissioners (BCBOC) to operate the county’s public schools.
  
• Lobato v. Colorado, No. 06CA0733 (Colo. App. Ct. Jan. 24, 2008) [HTML 3,192kb]
  The Colorado Court of Appeals has ruled that 14 school districts lacked legal standing to challenge the adequacy of the state’s school finance system and that the challenge by 47 parents addressed a nonjusticiable political question, i.e., one not capable of being decided by a court.
  
• School Dist. of the City of Pontiac v. Spellings, No. 05-2708 (6th Cir. Jan. 7, 2008) [HTML 6,255kb]
  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (KY, MI, OH, TN) has ruled that a group of school districts from several states, the National Education Association (NEA), and ten NEA-affiliate education associations have stated a valid legal claim that they are not liable for the costs of complying with mandates under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in excess of the federal funding provided.
  
• Federal Way Sch. Dist. No. 210 v. Washington (Wash. Super. Ct. Nov. 2, 2007) [HTML 2,750kb]
  A state trial court has ruled that the State of Washington’s system for providing salary funding to school districts violates the state constitution’s requirement to provide a general and uniform system of public schools.
  
• Comm. for Educ. Equality v. Missouri, No. 04-323022 (Mo. Cir. Ct. Oct. 17, 2007) [HTML 2,462kb]
  A Missouri trial court has ruled that the state’s current system and level of funding public education conforms to the Missouri Constitution, which requires not “less than twenty-five percent of the state revenue, exclusive of interest and sinking fund, to be applied annually to the support of the free public schools.”
  
• Committee for Educ. Equality v. State of Missouri, No. 04-323022 (Mo. Cir. Ct. Aug. 29, 2007) [HTML 4,622kb]
  A Missouri trial court has rejected a lawsuit challenging the state’s funding scheme for public education.
  
• Moore v. State of Alaska, No. 04-9756 (Alaska Super. Ct. June 26, 2007) [HTML 5,907kb]
  An Alaska state court has ruled that students may not be denied a high school diploma for failing to pass the state high school exit exam if their schools are failing to provide an adequate education.
  
• In re: Initiative Petition No. 384 [HTML 1,976kb]
  The Oklahoma Supreme Court has rejected an initiative petition to require 65% of school operational funds be spent in the classroom.
  
• Lake View Sch. Dist. No. 25 v. Huckabee, No. 01-836 (Ark. May 31, 2007) [HTML 3,117kb]
  The Arkansas Supreme Court, based on the findings of court-appointed special masters, has ruled that the state’s latest school financing plan satisfies the adequacy requirements of the state constitution.
  
• Nebraska Coalition for Educ. Equity and Adequacy v. Heineman, No. 05-1357 (Neb. May 11, 2007) [HTML 5,004kb]
  The Nebraska Supreme Court has dismissed a lawsuit by the Nebraska Coalition for Educational Equity and Adequacy (NCEEA), a coalition of 43 school districts, claiming that the state’s system of funding public education violates its duty under the Nebraska Constitution to provide for an “adequate” and “quality” education.
  
• Oklahoma Educ. Assoc. v. Okla., No. 103,702 (Okla. May 8, 2007) [HTML 3,531kb]
  The Oklahoma Supreme Court has affirmed the dismissal of a suit brought by the Oklahoma Education Association (OEA) against the State of Oklahoma challenging the state's school funding scheme.
  
• Zuni Public Sch. Dist. No. 89 v. Dep’t of Educ., No. 05-1508 (U.S. S. Ct. April 17, 2007) [HTML 4,861kb]
  In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected a claim by two New Mexico school districts that a federal regulation interpreting a funding formula under the federal Impact Aid Act unfairly deprives them of resources.
  
• Board of Educ. of the County of Kanawha v. W. Va. Bd. of Educ., No. 33081 (W.Va. Dec. 4, 2006) [HTML 4,055kb]
  The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia ruled in December that the state’s school funding system violates the state constitution’s equal protection provision to the extent it fails to adjust the state’s share of funding for those school districts that are required by state law to divert a part of locally raised revenues to non-school purposes.
  
• Young v. Williams, No. 03-00055/01152 (Cir. Ct., Div. II., Feb. 13, 2007) [HTML 3,793kb]
  A state court has ruled that Kentucky’s system of funding public schools is a matter for the legislature rather than judiciary.
  
• Crane Elementary Sch. Dist. v. State of Arizona, No. 04-0076 (Ariz. App. Nov. 22, 2006) [HTML 5,750kb]
  An Arizona appellate court has upheld a trial court’s 2003 dismissal of a suit brought by a coalition of school districts that claimed the state’s funding scheme for public education violates the Arizona constitution’s guarantee of a “basic education.”
  
• Campaign for Fiscal Equity v. State of New York, No. 136 (N.Y. Nov. 20, 2006) [HTML 3,619kb]
  The New York Court of Appeals, that state’s highest court, has affirmed an appellate court’s decision upholding the constitutionality of the state’s funding scheme for New York City’s public schools, with two modifications.
  
• School Board of Miami-Dade County v. King, Nos. 05-4521/05-4524/05-2526 (Fla. App. Oct. 31, 2006) [HTML 3,638kb]
  A Florida appeals court has rejected a suit by five local districts challenging the legislature’s state aid formula on state constitutional grounds.
  
• Frank G. v. Board of Educ. of Hyde Park, No. 04-4981-CV (July 27, 2006) [HTML 7,119kb]
  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled in late July that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) does not preclude public reimbursement of private school tuition for a student who never received any special education or related services from the school district.
  
• Londonderry Sch. Dist. SUA No. 12 et al. v. State, No. 2006-258 (N.H. Sept. 8, 2006) [HTML 3,110kb]
  The New Hampshire Supreme Court has again found that the state has failed to define an adequate education under the state constitution, upholding a lower court decision on that question.
  
• Flores v. Horne, No. 06-15378 (9th Cir. Aug. 23, 2006) [HTML 3,733kb]
  In a short unpublished and unsigned memorandum opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has vacated, on procedural grounds, an Arizona federal district court’s decision that the Arizona legislature’s plan for funding English language learner (ELL) fails to comply with the district court’s original 2000 order.
  
• Montoy v. State, No. 92,032 (Kan. July 28, 2006) [HTML 4,612kb]
  In a 4-2 per curiam decision, the Kansas Supreme Court has dismissed a suit challenging the adequacy and equity of the state legislature’s school finance plan.
  
• Johnstone v. Thompson, No. 06-0400 (Ga. June 12, 2006) [HTML 3,249kb]
  The Georgia Supreme Court has ruled that the Cobb County School Board (CCSB) was not legally authorized to use proceeds from a special purpose local option sales tax (SPLOST) to purchase laptop computers for all middle and high school students, because that use of the tax proceeds was different than the purpose of the tax initiative presented to and approved by the county's voters.
  
• Durham Land Owners v. County of Durham, No. 05-736 (N.C. App. June 06, 2006) [HTML 2,753kb]
  The North Carolina Court of Appeals has unanimously affirmed in part and reversed in part a lower court's decision that counties cannot levy school impact fees on home developers without the necessary state enabling legislation.
  
• Nagy v. Evansville-Vanderburgh School Corporation, No. 82S01-0409-CV-428 (Ind. March 30, 2006) [HTML 5,141kb]
  The Indiana Supreme Court has ruled that a school district’s imposition of a $20 student services fee on all students in grades K-12 violates Article 8, Section 1 of the Indiana Constitution, which guarantees a tuition-free public education.
  
• Campaign for Fiscal Equity v. State of New York, 2006 NY Slip Op. 02284 (N.Y. App. Div. March 23, 2006) [HTML 3,737kb]
  A New York appellate court has ruled that the state must provide between $4.7 billion and $5.63 billion in additional operating funds to New York City schools in order to satisfy the state’s “constitutional education funding obligations.”
  
• Londonderry School District SUA No. 12 et al. v. State, No. 05-0406 (N.H. Super. Ct. March 8, 2006) [HTML 7,117kb]
  A state superior court has ruled that New Hampshire's school funding system violates the state constitution's requirement that the state provide New Hampshire's children with an adequate public education.
  
• Columbia Falls Elementary School District No. 6 v. State of Montana, No. 04-390 (March 22, 2005) [HTML 3,057kb]
  The Montana Supreme Court has ruled that the state's system of funding public elementary and secondary education violates Article X, § 1(3) of the Montana Constitution, which states, "[t]he legislature shall provide a basic system of free quality public elementary and secondary schools."
  
• Abbeville County School District v. State, No. 31-0169 (S.C. Ct. Comm. Pl. Dec.29, 2005) [HTML 4,570kb]
  A South Carolina trial court has ruled that the State of South Carolina is failing to provide students with the opportunity to receive a "minimally adequate education" as required under the state constitution, because the state has not provided "effective and adequately funded early childhood intervention programs designed to address the impact of poverty on [students'] educational abilities and achievements."