Standard Post with Image

Emotional Distress Damages Unavailable in Section 504 Actions

On April 28, 2022, the United States Supreme Court narrowed the scope of damages available under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504), ruling that emotional distress damages are not recoverable in private actions to enforce Section 504 and other similar Spending Clause antidiscrimination statutes, including the Affordable Care Act (ACA), Title VI, and Title IX.

Read More
Standard Post with Image

In a Victory for Public Agencies, United States Supreme Court Upholds City Off-Premises Sign Ordinance

In its recent holding in City of Austin, Texas v. Reagan National Advertising of Austin, LLC (U.S., Apr. 21, 2022, No. 20-1029), The United States Supreme Court upheld the right of public agencies to regulate on-premises and off-premises signs differently.

Read More
Standard Post with Image

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds a Community College Board's Censure of a Board Member

On March 24, 2022, the United States Supreme Court decided a case relevant to public agency governing boards managing disruptive board members. The case was originally brought by David Wilson, an elected trustee on the Houston Community College Board.

Read More
Standard Post with Image

Cautionary Click Tale: California Court of Appeal Holds that Online Pop-Up Provides Adequate Notice of Binding Agreement Terms

In B.D. v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. (Mar. 29, 2022, No. D078506)    Cal.App.5th    , the California Court of Appeal held that a pop-up license agreement used for an online videogame provided adequate notice to users that they would be bound by its terms, including a requirement for binding arbitration.

Read More
Standard Post with Image

Foreseeability in Sexual Abuse Cases: Appellate Court Clarifies Legal Standards for Claims Against School Districts

In a recent case, the California Court of Appeal held that school administrators may breach a duty to protect students from sexual abuse by district employees by failing to take reasonable measures to prevent abuse, even if the school does not have actual knowledge of the employee’s history of committing, or propensity to commit, sexual abuse.

Read More
Standard Post with Image

California Whistleblower Retaliation Claims Subject to Statutory Test Rather than Higher Federal Standard

In Lawson v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. (2022) 12 Cal.5th703, the California Supreme Court determined that the proper method for presenting and evaluating a claim of whistleblower retaliation under Labor Code section 1102.5 is the framework prescribed by statute in Labor Code section 1102.6 rather than the well-established burden shifting framework set forth in McDonnel Douglas

Read More
Standard Post with Image

Ninth Circuit Holds that "Specific Learning Disability" Evaluation and IEP Satisfied FAPE for Dyslexic Student

In Crofts v. Issaquah School District No. 411 (9th Cir. Jan. 12, 2022, No. 19-35473)   F.4th   , the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a school district properly assessed a student for dyslexia when it conducted an evaluation for a “specific learning disability,” as provided under the Individuals with Disabilities Education

Read More
Standard Post with Image

Student Not Entitled to Receive Medical ABA Therapy on Campus from Private Provider

Although a seven-year-old boy with autism had an established medical need for 40 hours per week of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) therapy, his school district properly denied his private provider from serving him on the public school campus during the school day, according to the December 27, 2021 decision from the United States District Court, Central District of California, in O.A. vs Orcut

Read More
Standard Post with Image

Court of Appeal Clarifies Executive Order's Effect on Government Claim Deadlines

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-35-20 on March 21, 2020 (Executive Order). The Executive Order extends the time by which a claim must be presented to a public entity under the Government Claims Act by 60 days.

Read More