A case worth watching
What will happen with the suit by L.W. et al. v Nevada Department of Education et al.?
A dozen students with disabilities though their parents sued the Nevada State Department of Education and the Clark County School District. The suit being bought by the parents on behalf of all students with disabilities in Nevada (it is a “class action”) alleges that the schools have essentially denied a free and appropriate education to all members of the “class” or students with disabilities. On 18 September 2025, the US District Court for the District of Nevada held that the suit should continue.
Mitchell Yell is following the case for Sped Law Blog. Here is part of his description of the situation from “A special education class action suit goes forward in Nevada”:
The parents’ lawyers want to get this case to trial as quickly as possible. If they win, it could affect more than 40,000 students with disabilities in the Clark County school district. The parents also asked for the appointment of a federal monitor to restructure the district’s educational system and for the Nevada Department of Education to provide support and oversight in the improvement efforts.
The case was filed 25 September 2024. Since it was filed, the Nevada Department of Education, the Clark County School District, and named individuations (people who fill leadership roles for those two agencies)—collectively, they are the defendants—have filed briefs requesting the the court dismiss the case. The decision of of 18 September 2025 essentially denied that the arguments of the defendants and allowed the suit to go forward.
Writing when the suit was originally filed, Corrado Rizzi of Class Action reported that the suit is based on a 2019 report of an examination of its special education that Clark County School District, itself, commissioned. Mr. Rizzi wrote that the suit alleged multiple, substantial problems.
A 2019 review of special education services, commissioned by the Clark County School District, identified “an assortment of systemic deficiencies,” the case relays. The lawsuit says that interviews with parents, teachers and community leaders show that the concerns brought to light in the review “not only continue to persist today, but have grown worse.”
The identified concerns included, among numerous others, that CCSD lacks a professional development program that builds the capacity of its people to improve outcomes for students with disabilities, an issue stemming from inadequate staffing levels in comparison to other big-city school systems, and “significant vacancies in almost all staffing areas,” the suit shares. Another concern was that school district data showed that students with disabilities were educated in gen-ed classes at a much lower rate than others and were more likely to be isolated and/or given out-of-school suspension, the complaint relays.
The review also found that roughly 1,500 students per year were hospitalized in a mental health treatment facility, with approximately 26 percent of those students having an individualized education plan, the case adds.
The CCSD allegedly maintains policies and practices that “purposely interfere” with the location and identification of students who need special education services; fails to provide reasonable accommodations for students with dyslexia, autism and/or other behavioral management needs; and maintains a practice of ignoring staffing shortages, relying disproportionately on long-term substitutes, non-certified staff and paraprofessionals to provide services to students with disabilities.
I hope to keep readers abreast of developments in this case. I expect that Mitch will be following it on Sped Law Blog. For those who would like to follow it via other sources, please see Justia Law’s page about the case, the section of the Pacer Monitor that tracks the case, the coverage by Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, or the Class Action site linked previously.
To keep up with coverage here on Special Education Today, make sure that you have a subscription to SET.