As the second iteration of the reexamination of recent court decisions concerning appropriate school psychology practice from both professional and legal perspectives, this article considers the following pair of cases with regard to the issue of eligibility under the classification of specific learning disabilities (SLD) under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Keep in mind the IDEA (2012) statutory requirements for evaluations, including: (a) "use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information"; (b) "not use any single measure or assessment as the sole criterion for determining [eligibility] …"; and (c) "use technically sound instruments …" The one overriding lesson is that reasonable professionals may well differ in their analysis and outcome in light of the relatively broad standards under the IDEA and the breadth and depth of their specialized training and experience. For readers who focus on a preventive or proactive approach, these cases seem to suggest that SLD eligibility evaluations should cover and consider multiple sources for both the definitional elements of SLD and also the need for special education. The bottom line is that such issues are not at all objectively simple in either a professional or legal sense, but the other pressing considerations include avoiding overidentification, using limited resources efficiently and equitably, and having effective general education interventions. This limited sample of professional and judicial opinion simply serves as a reminder that the school psychologist--like a judge--plays a pivotal and trying role in deciding high-stakes issues, such as whether the child is entitled to an IEP and the other special protections of the IDEA.