As some alert readers have pointed out. My recent post on the bad economy and the law contained a serious typographical error. I left out the word "not." Yes, that is a very bad error.
In my discussion of the decision by the United States Supreme Court in Cedar Rapids Community Sch. Dist. v. Garret F. 119 S.Ct. 992, 29 IDELR 966 (1999) I mistakenly said that the cost of services could be a defense to a violation of IDEA. In fact the ruling of the high court was just the opposite. The supremes emphatically rejected the argument that cost could be a defense.
I apologize for the error. I hope that my proofreading error has not caused any inconvenience.
I remain interested in your opinions concerning expense or cost as a possible defense to an IDEA violation. Also I'd really like to hear about any cases in which cost is raised as a defense or where you suspect that cost is a factor in the decision-making.
I apologize for the error. I hope that my proofreading error has not caused any inconvenience.
I remain interested in your opinions concerning expense or cost as a possible defense to an IDEA violation. Also I'd really like to hear about any cases in which cost is raised as a defense or where you suspect that cost is a factor in the decision-making.
Image by wallyg via Flickr
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=b70d8ee8-7636-4861-910c-a611b9046bee)
No comments:
Post a Comment