Arlington Central School District Board of Education v. Pearl Murphy et Vir (548 U.S. 291)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 26, 2006 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 548 U.S. 291 · 126 S. Ct. 2455
- Decided
- June 26, 2006
- Term
- October Term 2005
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority author
- Justice Alito
- Issue area
- Attorneys
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Alito delivered the opinion of the Court. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA or Act) provides that a court “may award reasonable attorneys’ fees as part of the costs” to parents who prevail in an action brought under the Act. Ill Stat. 92, 20 U. S. C. § 1415(i)(3)(B). We granted certiorari to decide whether this fee-shifting provision authorizes prevailing parents to recover fees for services rendered by experts in IDEA actions. We hold that it does not. I Respondents Pearl and Theodore Murphy filed an action under the IDEA on behalf of their son, Joseph Murphy, seeking to require petitioner Arlington Central School District Board of Education to pay for their son’s private school tuition for specified school years. Respondents prevailed in the District Court, 86 F. Supp. 2d 354 (SDNY 2000), and the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed, 297 F. 3d 195 (2002). As prevailing parents, respondents then sought $29,350 in fees for the services of an educational consultant, Marilyn Arons, who assisted respondents throughout the IDEA proceedings. The District Court granted respondents’ request in part. It held that only the value of Arons’ time spent between the hearing request and the ruling in respondents’ favor could properly be considered charges incurred in an “action or proceeding brought” under the Act, see 20 U. S. C. § 1415(i)(3)(B).…
Excerpt of a 22,096-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.