Case Citator › A.W. v. Jersey City Public Schools

A.W. v. Jersey City Public Schools

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Declined by some courts
Court
Third Circuit
Citation
486 F.3d 791
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
67 of 67
Citing cases (total)
67
Treatment dates
2011
Declined by some courts
At least one reviewed court has declined to follow this case. No reviewed court has overruled it. One federal district court declined to follow A.W. v. Jersey City Public Schools on Section 1983 claims for violations of Section 504. It allowed a parallel Section 1983 claim that A.W. would have barred.
More on how this was screened

All 67 flagged citations have been read. The confirmed treatment is listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

67 later cases cite A.W. v. Jersey City Public Schools; 67 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on A.W. v. Jersey City Public Schools?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Declined to follow

  • The Western District of New York rejected A.W.'s bar on Section 1983 claims for Section 504 violations and allowed a parallel claim to proceed.

    Stahura-Uhl v. Iroquois Central School District · W.D.N.Y. · filed

    See Vinson v. Thomas, 288 F.3d 1145 (9th Cir.2002) (finding no § 1983 claim for Rehabilitation Act violations). ... The Third Circuit has also adopted this view. See A.W. v. Jersey City Pub. Sch., 486 F.3d 791 (3rd Cir.2007). However, this Court is compelled to find differently considering the Supreme Court’s more recent holding in Fitzgerald v. Barnstable School Committee, 555 U.S. 246, 129 S.Ct. 788, 555 U.S. 246, 129 S.Ct. 788, 172 L.Ed.2d 582 (2009). ... Applying that analysis leads to the inevitable conclusion that the Rehabilitation scheme is not “comprehensive” and does not preclude a parallel § 1983 claim. This conclusion is buttressed by the presumption in favor of Stahura-Uhl, as noted above. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to dismiss this claim must be denied.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads A.W. v. Jersey City Public Schools and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace