No. 21-1373

D. D., A Minor, By and Through His Guardian ad Litem, Michaela Ingram, v. Los Angeles Unified School District

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-04-22
Status: GVR
Type: Paid
Relisted (4)
Tags: americans-with-disabilities-act exhaustion exhaustion-requirement fry-v-napoleon-community-schools futility-doctrine idea-administrative-procedures individuals-with-disabilities-education-act money-damages section-1415 special-education-claims
Key Terms:
Arbitration ERISA
Latest Conference: 2023-05-18 (distributed 4 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether Section 1415(/) requires exhaustion of anon-IDEA claim seeking money damages that are not available under the IDEA?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) preserves the rights of children with disabilities to bring claims under the Constitution and other federal anti-discrimination statutes, so long as they exhaust the IDEA’s administrative procedures if their non-IDEA suit “seek[s] relief that is also available under [the IDEA].” 20 U.S.C. § 1415()). In the decision below, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of petitioner’s claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)! for failure to exhaust— even though it was undisputed that petitioner had settled his IDEA-based special education claims with the school district to the satisfaction of all parties. In addition, interpreting Fry v. Napoleon Community Schools, 187 §.Ct. 743 (2017), the Ninth Circuit held that the IDEA’s exhaustion requirement applies even when the plaintiff only seeks money damages for past injuries under a non-IDEA statute, a remedy that is not available under the plain language of the IDEA. The Questions Presented Are: 1. Whether Section 1415(/) requires exhaustion of anon-IDEA claim seeking money damages that are not available under the IDEA? 2. Whether, and in what circumstances, courts should excuse further exhaustion of the IDEA’s administrative proceedings under Section 1415(J) when such proceedings would be futile by virtue of settlement, or otherwise. 120 U.S.C. § 12101 et. seq.

Docket Entries

2023-05-26
Judgment issued.
2023-05-22
Rehearing DENIED.
2023-05-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/18/2023.
2023-04-24
2023-04-03
Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of <i>Luna Perez</i> v. <i>Sturgis Public Schools</i>, 598 U. S. ___ (2023).
2023-03-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/31/2023.
2022-09-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-06-21
Rescheduled.
2022-06-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/23/2022.
2022-05-19
Brief of respondent Los Angeles Unified School District in opposition filed.
2022-04-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 23, 2022)
2022-02-09
Application (21A404) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until April 18, 2022.
2022-02-07
Application (21A404) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 17, 2022 to April 18, 2022, submitted to Justice Kagan.

Attorneys

D.D., a Minor, by and through His Guardian Ad Litem, Michaela Ingram
Patricia Ann Van DykeLaw Office of Patricia A. Van Dyke, Petitioner
Los Angeles Unified School District
Matthew Raymond HicksBDG Law Group, Respondent