Laura Hickey v. Irving Independent School District

Fifth Circuit

Laura Hickey v. Irving Independent School District

986 F.2d 916, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 4841, 1993 WL 71076

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 15, 1993

Docket91-7350

StatusPublished

This text of 986 F.2d 916 (Laura Hickey v. Irving Independent School District) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Laura Hickey v. Irving Independent School District, 986 F.2d 916, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 4841, 1993 WL 71076 (5th Cir. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

BY THE COURT:

IT IS ORDERED that the motion of appellees to recall the Court’s mandate, 976 F.2d 980 (1992), vacate its opinion and uphold the trial court’s judgment dismissing this case is DENIED. We, however, express no opinion on appellees’ contention that appellant failed to exhaust her administrative remedies under 20 U.S.C. § 1400, et seq., the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”). As appellees correctly point out, they were not served with the complaint and were not made parties below.

Accordingly, the district court, on remand, may reconsider its 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) dismissal not only in light of the timeliness of Hickey’s complaint, but also examine whether Hickey exhausted her administrative remedies under IDEA. See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(f).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BY THE COURT:

IT IS ORDERED that the motion of appellees to recall the Court’s mandate, 976 F.2d 980 (1992), vacate its opinion and uphold the trial court’s judgment dismissing this case is DENIED. We, however, express no opinion on appellees’ contention that appellant failed to exhaust her administrative remedies under 20 U.S.C. § 1400, et seq., the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”). As appellees correctly point out, they were not served with the complaint and were not made parties below.

Accordingly, the district court, on remand, may reconsider its 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) dismissal not only in light of the timeliness of Hickey’s complaint, but also examine whether Hickey exhausted her administrative remedies under IDEA. See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(f).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

986 F.2d 916, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 4841, 1993 WL 71076, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laura-hickey-v-irving-independent-school-district-ca5-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack