Supreme Court Narrows the IDEA’s Exhaustion Requirement

By Nathan Floyd

The United States Supreme Court recently issued an opinion in the case of Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, 598 U.S. 142 (2023), which will make it easier for families of students with disabilities to bring suit against school districts for alleged discrimination on the basis of disability. This case dealt with what is known as the exhaustion requirement of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This provision, found at 20 U.S.C. § 1415(l), provides that before filing a civil lawsuit under other federal laws protecting the rights of children with disabilities, the IDEA’s due process procedures must be exhausted when the relief being sought is also available under the IDEA.

In Perez, a deaf student filed a due process hearing complaint with the Michigan Department of Education against his former school district based on allegations that the district failed to comply with its duties under the IDEA to provide a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) in a number of respects. The student and the school district reached a settlement before a hearing was held. Under the settlement agreement, the school district agreed to provide the student with the forwardlooking equitable relief he sought, including additional schooling at the Michigan School for the Deaf.

After settling the due process complaint, the student filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and seeking backwards-looking relief in the form of compensatory damages. The district court dismissed the federal lawsuit, concluding that the IDEA barred the plaintiff from bringing an ADA claim without first exhausting all of IDEA’s administrative dispute resolution procedures, which he had not done, and the court of appeals affirmed based on prior precedent.

On appeal to the United States Supreme Court, the Court unanimously found in favor of the student. It found that the IDEA’s administrative exhaustion requirement in Section 1415(l) applies only to actions that seek relief also available under the IDEA. Because the only form of relief sought in Perez’s lawsuit was compensatory damages under the ADA—which are not available under the IDEA—the IDEA’s exhaustion requirement did not apply.

This ruling has important implications for school districts that become involved in disputes with special education students or their families. Going forward, claims brought under federal laws protecting the rights of children with disabilities that do not seek relief from a denial of a FAPE—the only relief available under the IDEA—are not subject to Section 1415(l)’s exhaustion requirement. Thus, a parent seeking non-FAPE related relief (such as compensatory damages) under a federal antidiscrimination statute no longer needs to exhaust the IDEA’s administrative remedies. This means it is now possible for a parent to file an IDEA due process action seeking forwardlooking relief for a denial of a FAPE and simultaneously bring an action seeking compensatory damages (i.e., backwardslooking non-FAPE related relief) for prior discriminatory conduct of the school district, even if the due process complaint and the lawsuit arise out of the same alleged events.

This Supreme Court decision places more power in a parent’s hands and could potentially put school districts in the position of “fighting a war on two fronts” due to the wider range of remedies that students and their families can pursue. If you have questions or concerns about how to navigate troublesome situations involving the IDEA and ADA, RFR attorneys are available to advise your school’s leadership regarding best practices, policies, and procedures. ■

Reproduced with permission from Rosenstein, Fist & Ringold, Attorneys and Counselors at Law, Chalkboard, an Education Newsletter from the Attorneys of Rosenstein, Fist & Ringold (2023 Issue 1).

Chris LeGrande

Getting to Know CCOSA’s Newest Executive Director

Chris LeGrande joined CCOSA as executive director of OASSP and OMLEA on July 1, 2023, after a long career at Guthrie Public Schools. You can reach him via email at LeGrande@ccosa.org.

Q: Where did you go to school?

A: I am a 1986 graduate of Guthrie High School and a 1991 graduate of Oklahoma State University, where I received a B.S. in Secondary Science Education. In 2005, I was awarded an M.A. in Educational Leadership from Southern Nazarene University.

Q: What made you become an educator?

A: From a young age, I very much enjoyed school. I performed well academically and had a junior high science teacher whose differentiated instruction challenged me intellectually and sparked an interest in science education.

Q: What educator made the greatest impact on your life, and how?

A: My junior high science teacher, Peggy Momsen, made learning fun and took a vested interest in my success as a student-athlete. Carolyn Hendricks, my 10th and 11th grade English teacher, fostered a love of writing and continually stressed the importance of presenting myself in a professional manner, both of which have been fundamental in my educational career.

Q: What have you been reading recently? What is your favorite book? Your favorite YA book?

A: I am currently reading “The Teacher’s Principal” by Jen Schwanke. My favorite book is “Unbroken” by Laura Hillenbrand. The Bible is my favorite young adult book.

Q: What are you responsible for at CCOSA?

A: I will be responsible for mentoring, coaching, and supporting middle-level and secondary principals. In addition, I will be assisting the entire CCOSA team as needed to ensure the success of our organization.

Q: What does courageous leadership mean to you?

A: For me, courageous leadership entails thinking outside the box and experimenting with creative and innovative strategies in which to improve your school or district. It involves possessing a “not afraid to fail” mentality. In short, nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Q: What advice would you give a new high school principal? A new middle school or junior high principal?

A: My advice to a new high school principal would be to learn to trust your administrative team and delegate responsibilities. You cannot successfully perform all your assigned duties on your own accord. My advice for a new middle school/junior high principal would be to never forget what it was like to be an adolescent. We are all kids at heart, and it is perfectly permissible to laugh at one’s self.

Q: What are you most looking forward to in your new role?

A: I relish the opportunity to travel our great state and meet with fellow middle-level and secondary principals to share and impart wisdom learned in over thirty years in the profession. Furthermore, I look forward to cultivating meaningful relationships and providing genuine support through both good times and bad. I want to be a champion for public education. ■