In Fry v. Napoleon Community Schools, published February 22, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed dismissal of a disabled student's suit against school districts and a principal for a school's refusal to permit the student's service dog to assist the student at school. The student sued under Title II of the ADA and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, alleging disability discrimination. The district court dismissed the suit, and the circuit court affirmed the dismissal, under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(l), part of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The subdivision states that the IDEA's remedies do not preclude suits under Title II or section 504, but that when such suits seek relief that is available under the IDEA, the plaintiff must exhaust the IDEA's administrative requirements.
The Supreme Court held that these exhaustion requirements apply only when a suit under Title II or section 504 seeks recovery for a denial of a Free and Appropriate Public Education, because a FAPE is the only remedy available under the IDEA. In determining whether a suit seeks recovery for denial of FAPE, a court should look past the wording of the complaint and determine the gravamen, or substance, of the lawsuit. The Court suggested asking whether the same lawsuit could be brought by a disabled child if the defendant were not a school (such as a public theater or library), or if the plaintiff were an adult rather than a student. If so, the lawsuit may not be subject to the exhaustion requirements. Additionally, that a plaintiff began administrative proceedings under the IDEA before filing suit may be evidence that the gravamen of the suit is denial of FAPE. The Court remanded the case to the lower courts to apply these tests.
Comments