| Educational institutions face a range of legal challenges as they strive to provide quality education on limited budgets. Davis Wright Tremaine offers an efficient team of lawyers experienced in critical matters that affect educational institutions at all levels, including K-12 schools, proprietary schools, technical and community colleges, universities and health professions schools. Our goal is to help you quickly and effectively deal with legal issues so you can focus on education.
Serving K-12 schools
Our work for K-12 schools has included a full range of matters related to the following:
- Charter schools
- Religion in schools and other First Amendment issues
- The Americans with Disabilities Act
- The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
- School board issues
- Open Meetings/Sunshine Laws
- Title IX (now the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act)
- The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)
- School security, drug testing and other Fourth Amendment issues
- Harassment and other student conduct issues
- ESL requirements
- Online education and Web-based learning
- The No Child Left Behind Act
Serving higher education
Our experience with traditional legal challenges faced by universities, colleges and technical schools includes matters involving:
- Admissions
- Student life
- Financial aid
- Scholarships and grants
- Foundations
- Tenured faculty issues
- International students
- Discrimination
- Accreditation issues
Our work with these issues includes:
- Risk assessment
- Policy review and drafting
- Regulatory analysis, reporting and compliance
Supporting practice areas
Educational institutions have numerous legal needs that are not specific to education. In those cases, our team will collaborate with you and other practice groups at our firm that can provide focused knowledge as in areas such as:
The multidisciplinary support we provide is indispensable, given the complex relationships among stakeholders within your institution and your need to work wisely and efficiently with communities, government and business. We understand that each situation presents particular challenges and opportunities and deserves a custom-tailored response, based on a thorough understanding of your specific needs and goals. |
Selected Experience Defended breach of contract and fraud action related to acquisition of online educational technology, which was successfully resolved after extensive discovery. (2007) Successfully represented parents in Equal Protection Clause challenge to a school district’s use of race in its student admissions plan in the Western District of Washington, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (en banc), Washington State Supreme Court, and U.S. Supreme Court. Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, 127 S.Ct. 2738 (U.S. 2007). Represented publisher in federal court putative nationwide class action alleging violations of the Washington Consumer Protection Act and the Washington Unsolicited Goods Act for demanding payment for goods that were purportedly free. After filing motion for judgment on the pleadings, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed all claims. (W.D. Wash. 2006) Represented The Copley Press, publisher of the San Diego Union-Tribune, in a Public Records Act lawsuit against San Diego State University. The courts ordered the university to release several documents, and awarded the newspaper its attorneys' fees and costs. 132 Cal. App. 4th 889 (Cal. Super. Ct., Cal. ct. App. 2005) Negotiated ownership of intellectual property with university conducting research funded by the client, a nonprofit organization. (2005) Represented union as case certified to Washington Supreme Court, which held that accrued lead time is not 'salaried' under the wage and hour law and that a single improper deduction or a requirement that employee 'make up' absences that occurred during normal business hours do not per se preclude employer from preserving the salaried employee exemption from the Washington Minimum Wage Act overtime pay requirements. (2003) Successfully represented school district (both trial and appellate courts) in a state court challenge alleging that the district's policy of random drug testing of student athletes violates the Oregon constitution. Or. App. 415, 56 P.3d 504 (Or. App. 2002) Successfully represented school district, arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court, and achieving reversal of the 9th Circuit's decision that the school district's policy of random drug testing of student athletes violated the Fourth Amendment. 515 U.S. 646 (U.S. 1995) Won affirmance of trial court's dismissal of contract dispute on appeal. | | Search Experience | | | |  |
|