Wrightslaw l No Child Left Behind l IDEA 2004 l Fetaweb l Yellow Pages for Kids l Harbor House Law Press
 Home > Main Law Library > Caselaw Library > Supreme Court Statement

The Special Ed Advocate
It's Unique ... and Free!

Enter your email address below:


2015 - 2016 Training Programs

Dec 3 - OKC

Dec 7 - Temecula, CA

Feb 25 - San Jose, CA

Feb 29 - NYC Metro Area

Mar 4 - McAllen, TX

Full Schedule

Be a Hero ...

 Jason at Ft. Benning
... to a Hero
Learn more


Topics from A-Z
Free Newsletter
Seminars & Training
Yellow Pages for Kids
Press Room

Books & Training

Wrightslaw Storesecure store lock
  Advocate's Store
  Student Bookstore
  Exam Copies
Training Center
Bulk Discounts
New! Military Discounts
Mail & Fax Orders

Advocacy Library

Doing Your Homework
Ask the Advocate
Newsletter Archives
Summer School Series
Success Stories

Law Library

IDEA 2004
No Child Left Behind
McKinney-Vento Homeless
Section 504
Fed Court Complaints


American Indian
Assistive Technology
Autism Spectrum
Behavior & Discipline
College/Continuing Ed
Due Process
Early Intervention (Part C)
Future Planning
High-Stakes Tests
Homeless Children
IDEA 2004
Identification & Child Find
Juvenile Justice
Law School & Clinics
Letters & Paper Trails
Military / DOD
No Child Left Behind
NCLB Directories
NCLB Law & Regs
Parental Protections
PE and Adapted PE
Privacy & Records
Procedural Safeguards
Progress Monitoring
Related Services
Research Based Instruction
Response to Intervention (RTI)
School Report Cards
Section 504
Teachers & Principals
Twice Exceptional (2e)
VA Special Education

Resources & Directories

Advocate's Bookstore
Advocacy Resources
  Disability Groups
  State DOEs
  State PTIs
Free Flyers
Free Pubs
Free Newsletters
Legal & Advocacy
   Legal Terms
   Assessment Terms
Best School Websites

Florence County School District Four v. Shannon Carter
510 U. S. 7 (1993)

The Opening Statement before the U.S. Supreme Court
October 6, l993
Peter W. D. Wright

Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court.

In 1983, when Shannon Carter was 13 years old, she entered seventh grade at Timmonsville School. Her mother told the school officials that Shannon could not read and requested that she be evaluated. The school system evaluated her and concluded that she was lazy, unmotivated, and a slow learner who needed to be pressured to work harder. Relying on this advice, her parents pressured her to work harder.

By February 1985, Shannon was sixteen years old. She was functionally illiterate, severely depressed, and suicidal. Her parents obtained counseling for her. The counselor recommended that Shannon receive a complete psychological evaluation. They found that Shannon had a severe learning disability and needed intense remedial educational services.

The school evaluated Shannon again and concurred that she had a severe learning disability and was average to above average in intelligence.

At a conference with parents, the school presented an individualized educational program to the parents. They proposed a resource program for Shannon. Shannon would be placed in a class with emotionally disturbed and mentally retarded children. The parents said that this was not appropriate. The school offered an itinerant program. This program consisted of three hours of special education a week.

As a seventeen year old, after a year of special education, she would be reading at the fifth grade level and would have fallen further behind. Her parents said this was inadequate.

Florence County refused to place Shannon in any public or private self contained program. The issue at the special education due process hearing and before the District Court Judge was whether or not District Four's program was appropriate.

The Trial Court not only found that District Four's program was wholly inadequate, but also found that Trident Academy provided Shannon with an excellent education. When she graduated, she was reading at the twelfth grade level. Shannon received an appropriate education at Trident. We ask that you ensure that her education was free.

(Note: Thirty-four days later, in a unanimous landmark decision, the Court ruled in favor of Shannon and her parents.)

Peter W. D. Wright, Esq.
P. O. Box 1008
Deltaville, VA 23043
Back to Top
email pwright@wrightslaw.com

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon The Special Ed Advocate: It's Free!


Wrightslaw: Special Education Law, 2nd Edition, by Pam and Pete Wright
About the Book

Wrightslaw: All About IEPs
About the Book

Wrightslaw: All About Tests and Assessments
About the Book

Surviving Due Process: Stephen Jeffers v. School Board
About the DVD Video


Copyright 1998-2015, Peter W. D. Wright and Pamela Darr Wright. All rights reserved.

Contact Us | Press Mission l Our Awards l Privacy Policy l Disclaimer l Site Map