Key IDEA Laws and Landmark Cases Every Parent Must Know (Maryland & Georgia Edition)
When schools push back on your child’s rights, the law is your strongest weapon. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)—backed by decades of case law—gives parents the power to hold schools accountable. But most parents don’t know which cases actually matter, especially in their own state.
Below is a parent-friendly guide to the key IDEA provisions and landmark cases you need to know, with specific highlights for Maryland (4th Circuit) and Georgia (11th Circuit) families. These are the cases Wrightslaw—the leading national resource for special education law—teaches advocates to cite in meetings, complaints, and hearings.
1. The Foundation: IDEA and Your Parent Rights
Under IDEA (20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq.), every child with a qualifying disability is entitled to:
Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE): Specially designed instruction and related services at no cost.
Individualized Education Program (IEP): A legally binding plan that must reflect your child’s unique needs and measurable goals.
Child Find (34 C.F.R. §300.111): The school must identify, locate, and evaluate any child who may need special education, even if you haven’t made a request.
Least Restrictive Environment (LRE): To the greatest extent appropriate, your child must be educated with nondisabled peers.
Parental Participation (34 C.F.R. §300.322): You are a full, equal member of the IEP team.
Procedural Safeguards (34 C.F.R. §§300.500–300.536): Including prior written notice (PWN), the right to disagree, mediation, complaints, and due process hearings.
Reference: Wrightslaw: IDEA 2004 Law & Regulations
2. Landmark Federal Cases Every Parent Should Know
These cases shape how IDEA is applied nationwide, including Maryland and Georgia:
Board of Education v. Rowley (458 U.S. 176, 1982)
Schools must provide a “basic floor of opportunity” but not necessarily maximize a child’s potential.
This case set the original FAPE standard.
Reference: Wrightslaw Rowley Overview
Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District (580 U.S., 2017)
Raised the standard: IEPs must be reasonably calculated to enable a child to make progress appropriate in light of their circumstances, not trivial advancement.
Reference: Wrightslaw Endrew F. Analysis
Forest Grove School District v. T.A. (557 U.S. 230, 2009)
Parents can be reimbursed for private school even if the child never received public school services, if the district denied FAPE.
Reference: Wrightslaw Forest Grove Summary
Schaffer v. Weast (546 U.S. 49, 2005) (Maryland case)
Originated in Montgomery County, MD. The Supreme Court ruled the burden of proof in due process lies with the party bringing the case (usually parents).
Reference: Wrightslaw Schaffer Summary
Honig v. Doe (484 U.S. 305, 1988)
Schools cannot unilaterally expel or suspend students for behavior tied to their disability without a Manifestation Determination Review.
Reference: Wrightslaw Honig Case
3. Maryland-Specific Cases (4th Circuit)
Maryland is in the 4th Circuit, which has influential rulings parents can cite:
Schaffer v. Weast (2005): Supreme Court case but started in Montgomery County; critical for parents in MD due process hearings.
Reusch v. Fountain (MD District Court, 1994): Established that failure to provide Extended School Year (ESY) services can violate FAPE.
Reference: Wrightslaw Reusch Case
Erickson v. Board of Education of Baltimore County (4th Cir.): Clarified standards for IEP adequacy and FAPE in Maryland.
Reference: Wrightslaw Erickson Summary
These cases can be cited when schools in Maryland deny ESY, minimize services, or offer subpar IEPs.
4. Georgia Context (11th Circuit)
Georgia parents rely primarily on Supreme Court cases (Rowley, Endrew F., Forest Grove, Honig) since most IDEA litigation in the 11th Circuit hasn’t reached the same notoriety. However:
Florence County School Dist. Four v. Carter (510 U.S. 7, 1993): Recognized tuition reimbursement for unilateral private placements (applies nationwide, including Georgia).
Georgia parents should use state complaint decisions and OCR rulings alongside these cases to strengthen advocacy.
Reference: Wrightslaw Caselaw Library
5. How to Use These Laws to Protect Your Child
Quote specific laws and cases in your requests. Schools take notice when you cite Endrew F. or Reusch.
Always request Prior Written Notice (PWN) when a school refuses something. By law (34 C.F.R. §300.503), they must explain their decision in writing, including data and alternatives.
Document everything: Keep a timeline of emails, IEP notes, progress reports, and service logs.
File a state complaint or OCR complaint before escalating to due process. These are free and can resolve issues quickly.
Don’t let budget excuses slide: Rowley and Endrew F. make it clear—funding does not excuse failure to provide FAPE.
Key Takeaways
IDEA is enforceable law, not a suggestion.
Wrightslaw is your go-to source for case law and practical advocacy tools (wrightslaw.com).
In Maryland, cases like Reusch and Schaffer v. Weast give you leverage.
In Georgia, national precedents like Endrew F., Forest Grove, and Carter strengthen your case.
Document, demand PWN, and don’t let schools push you into silence.
Need Help Navigating These Laws?
The IEP Files™ helps parents in Maryland, Georgia, and beyond apply these cases to their real-world battles. Whether you’re facing a denied evaluation, missing services, or preparing for a hearing, we’ll help you turn legal knowledge into action.
