Now watch, the justices who normally favor school vouchers will probably side with the school district this time around.

So I'm not very good at reading legal documents, but I think I get the gist of what this is about:

Forest Grove School District failed to see that this kid has a learning disability or two.

The parents failed to be attentive parents, so the kid started smoking pot.

The kid got caught, and the parents went nuclear.

The kid finally got an evaluation, and it was discovered that he has disabilities. The hearing officer then may or may not have screwed up in granting something to the parents that may or may not be eligible to them under the law (sounds like this is what is under contention).

Forest Grove doesn't want to pay the parents, so they're gonna pay lawyers to fight it instead.

The parents now want the compensation for private schooling that they may or may not be granted under the law, so they're gonna pay lawyers too.

In the end, the lawyers get nice fat checks and another line item on their resumé, the school district gets a precedent case one way or the other, and the kid is still jonesing for another hit off the bong, but this time with a private education more geared towards his capabilities; which may or may not be paid for by the government.

Is that about right?