K. et al v. Department of Education, State of Hawaii
| Sam K., Diane C. and George K. |
| Department of Education, State of Hawaii |
| 1:2012cv00355 |
| June 20, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| Hawaii Office |
| Honolulu |
| ALAN C KAY |
| BARRY M. KURREN |
| Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 20 U.S.C. ยง 1401 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
65
ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION RE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS for 61 . Signed by JUDGE ALAN C KAY on 06/17/2013. (eps) -- the Court adopts the magistrate judge's Findings and Recommendation that Plaintiffs be awarded a total of $77,745.10 in attorneys' fees and costs. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic noti fications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
61
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION THAT PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES BE GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART re 49 . Signed by Judge BARRY M. KURREN on 04/30/2013. (eps)-- FINDS and RECOMMENDS that Plaintiffs be awa rded a total amount of $77,226.93 in attorneys' fees. The DOE did not object to Plaintiffs' costs, and the Court awards Plaintiffs costs of $518.17. Thus, the total award of fees and costs is $77,745.10. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER Affirming in Part and Reversing in Part the Administrative Hearing Officer's Decision on May 24, 2012 in DOE-SY 1112-047 re 40 . Signed by JUDGE ALAN C KAY on 02/13/2013. (eps) -- The Court AFFIRMS the AHO's Fi ndings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision in DOE-SY 1112-047 dated May 24, 2012, except for the AHO's conclusion that Haw. Rev. Stat. § 302A-443(a)(2) bars Plaintiff Sam K.'s claim for tuition reimbursement, which is REVERSED. T he Court finds that Plaintiffs are entitled to reimbursement CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR STAY PUT 9 . Signed by JUDGE ALAN C KAY on 08/22/2012. (eps) -- Having concluded that Loveland Academy is Sam K.'s then-current educational placement, the Court grants Plaintiffs' Motion for Stay Put in order to maintain the status quo during the pendency of the instant appeal, and in order to uphold the mandates of the IDEA and the significant policy concerns for which it was enacted. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry .
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
