Richardson 1

College of Southern of Nevada

Landmark Court Case: Cedar Rapids Community School District vs. Garret F.

Raiden Richardson

Education 203-3001

Ms. Jacqueline Sgobba

10/3/20
 Richardson 2

Landmark Case: Cedar Rapids Community School District vs. Garret F.

This Landmark Court case was a dispute on the matter of related services and medical

services that are to be provided in schools by the IDEA. The case features a young boy named

Garret, who was in a motorcycle accident when he was younger. The aftermath of this accident

left Garret a quadriplegic and ventilator dependent. In able for Garret to attend school he had to

have a personal assistant to care for his health care needs. Some of which are, taken from “Cedar

Rapids Community School District vs. Garret F.” by Allan G. Osborne, Jr. : “urinary bladder

catheterization, suctioning of his tracheostomy, observation for respiratory distress,”   This was

provided by his family until he was in fifth grade and his mother asked the school to provide the

medical assistance, during his school day. The school board refused their request and the family

ordered a due process hearing to resolve the issue, under the IDEA.

An administrative law judge ruled the school district responsible for providing the

medical service. In Iowa a federal trial court affirmed the decision, stating that the service did not

fall under the medical exclusion clause in the IDEA. The school board appealed the ruling. The

Eighth Circuit affirmed the previous judge and court rulings, stating that because the required

services could be attended by a nurse and not a physician the service falls under the school’s

health and related services, instead of medical services. The school board appealed the ruling

again, and brought it up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court agreed to take on the case.

Garret and his family won the case. The Supreme Court affirmed the Eighth Circuit

ruling. It was a 7 to 2 decision. Only two justices dissented on the issue. Justice Stevens, who

wrote for the majority stated that the IDEA’s definition of related services allowed Garret’s

much needed services be provided by the school board. This was to uphold the decision that the
 Richardson 3

IDEA allows all disabled students be granted an education and that includes the school providing

any requirements the student needs to attend. The court acknowledged that there might be an

issue with the financial burden of providing these services, but still held firm on their ruling. In

his article “Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garret F. -scope of ‘related services’

under American Special education law” Robert E. Rains gives a detailed description of the

majority rule: “ This case is about whether meaningful access to the public school will be

assured, no the level of education that a school must finance one is attained… the District must

fund such ‘relate services’ in order to help guarantee that students like Garret are integrated into

the public schools.”

Works Cited:

Allan G. Osbourne Jr. “Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garret F.

https://www.usedulaw.com/205-cedar-rapids-community-school-district-v-garret-f.html

Robert E. Rains “Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garret F. -scope of ‘related services’

under American Special education law”

 Richardson 4

http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.csn.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&sid=b476753f-

6dca-4d8b-bd97-e7f81755c4e3%40sdc-v-sessmgr02