Amanda J. v. Clark County School District, 267 F.3d. 877 (9th Cir. 2001).
2.
Barnes v. Gorman, 122 S. Ct. 2097 (2002).
3.
Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982).
4.
Bonita USD, 27 IDELR 248 (1997).
5.
Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garrett F., 526 U.S. 66 (1999).
6.
Gill ex rel. Gill v. Columbia 93 School District, 217 F.3d 1027 (8th Cir. 2000).
7.
Hartmann v. Loudoun CountyBoard of Education, 118 F.3d 996 (4th Cir. 1997).
8.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (amended 1997)
9.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act regulations, 34 C.F.R. § 300 et seq.
10.
Katsiyannis, A., & Maag, W.J. (1998). Disciplining students with disabilities: Practice considerations for implementing IDEA '97. Behavioral Disorders , 23, 276—289.
11.
Letter to Cox, 36 IDELR 66, OSEP (2001).
12.
Murphy v. UPS, 527 U.S. 516 (1999).
13.
Olmstead, Georgia Department of Human Resources v. L. C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999).
14.
O' Neil, R.E., Horner, R.H., Albin, R.W., Sprague, J.R., Storey, K., & Newton, J.S. (1997). Functional assessment and program development for problem behavior: A practical handbook. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
15.
President's Commission on Excellence in Special Education Report: A New Era: Revitalizing special education for children and their families. ( 2002). Retrieved October 23, 2002, from http://www.ed.gov/inits/commissionsboards/whspecialeducation/reports/summ.html
16.
Reusch v. Fountain, 872 F. Supp. 1421, 21 IDELR 1107 (D. Md. 1994).
17.
Smith, C.R. (2000). Behavioral and discipline provisions of IDEA 97: Implicit competencies yet to be confirmed. Exceptional Children , 66, 403—412.
18.
W.G. ex rel. R.G. v. Board of Trustees of Target Range School District No. 23, 960 F.2d 1479 (9th Cir. 1992).
19.
Yell, M.L. (1998). The law and special education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
