Illustration of a diverse group of people dressed in blue
Discrimination under Americans with Disabilities Act
A.L. v. Clovis Unified School District Case No. 18-16669 – Federal Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit update
Member(s) Involved: Clovis Unified School District
Current status and/or outcome:
On March 18, 2020, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Clovis Unified School District, affirming the lower court’s dismissal of claims against the district. The Ninth Circuit found that the district court correctly concluded that the gravamen of Plaintiff’s claim was for the denial of FAPE, that Plaintiff did not exhaust IDEA remedies because plaintiff’s IDEA claims were settled without receiving an administrative decision on the merits, and that because Appellants’ decision to settle in lieu of pursuing IDEA administrative remedies was “clear from the face of the complaint,” dismissal was proper. Importantly, the decision means districts are not required to wait until after potentially expensive discovery procedures to bring a motion to dismiss a case for a failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
Importance of statewide issue:
If school districts cannot assert failure to exhaust as a motion to dismiss, then the district would have to bring the motion as a motion for summary judgement, meaning that resolution of the case will be significantly delayed and the district would be required to undergo costly discovery procedures, spending additional resources on legal fees.
“CSBA’s Education Legal Alliance (ELA) stands alone in championing the interests of school districts in the judicial arena. In 2020, the ELA filed an amicus brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals supporting Clovis USD in a case involving the obligation of a plaintiff to exhaust IDEA administrative remedies before suing for alleged violation of Section 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Ninth agreed with the district, affirming a lower court’s dismissal of the claims against it. Although we never doubted the district was in the right, the support from CSBA’S Education Legal Alliance was greatly appreciated and helped the court reach a decision that spared Clovis USD the significant time, resources, and costs that would have accompanied extended litigation.”
— Susan K. Hatmaker,
Clovis USD Trustee
Current status and/or outcome:
On March 18, 2020, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Clovis Unified School District, affirming the lower court’s dismissal of claims against the district. The Ninth Circuit found that the district court correctly concluded that the gravamen of Plaintiff’s claim was for the denial of FAPE, that Plaintiff did not exhaust IDEA remedies because plaintiff’s IDEA claims were settled without receiving an administrative decision on the merits, and that because Appellants’ decision to settle in lieu of pursuing IDEA administrative remedies was “clear from the face of the complaint,” dismissal was proper. Importantly, the decision means districts are not required to wait until after potentially expensive discovery procedures to bring a motion to dismiss a case for a failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
Importance of statewide issue:
If school districts cannot assert failure to exhaust as a motion to dismiss, then the district would have to bring the motion as a motion for summary judgement, meaning that resolution of the case will be significantly delayed and the district would be required to undergo costly discovery procedures, spending additional resources on legal fees.
“CSBA’s Education Legal Alliance (ELA) stands alone in championing the interests of school districts in the judicial arena. In 2020, the ELA filed an amicus brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals supporting Clovis USD in a case involving the obligation of a plaintiff to exhaust IDEA administrative remedies before suing for alleged violation of Section 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Ninth agreed with the district, affirming a lower court’s dismissal of the claims against it. Although we never doubted the district was in the right, the support from CSBA’S Education Legal Alliance was greatly appreciated and helped the court reach a decision that spared Clovis USD the significant time, resources, and costs that would have accompanied extended litigation.”
— Susan K. Hatmaker,
Clovis USD Trustee
Summary of the case:

In this case, a special education student filed claims of discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504, and denial of FAPE, among others. The student alleged that the school district discriminated against her when it “unnecessarily segregated” her, causing injuries she sustained in the restrictive placement that denied her the full benefit of the district’s programs and services. The student also claimed that the district discriminated against her when it failed to respond to her parent’s request for accommodations, and that she suffered physical and emotional harm as a result of the district’s negligent hiring, supervision, and training of employees.

The district prevailed on a motion to dismiss the case at the trial court level, on the basis that the student did not exhaust her administrative remedies under IDEA. The court found that the substance of plaintiff’s complaint was a denial of FAPE, which overlaps with the IDEA, and that plaintiff was therefore required to exhaust her administrative remedies under IDEA. The plaintiff subsequently filed a due process complaint with the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) alleging failure to provide FAPE. The due process complaint was eventually settled with the district. Plaintiff has appealed the trial court’s ruling on the motion to dismiss, arguing that a motion to dismiss is not the proper avenue for a failure to exhaust administrative remedies argument, and further claimed that she did exhaust her administrative remedies, despite the settlement of her due process case.

On Feb. 20, 2019, the ELA filed an amicus brief in support of the district, providing support for the arguments that the failure to exhaust IDEA administrative remedies is appropriate grounds for a motion to dismiss, and that settling a special education due process complaint before the OAH does not constitute exhaustion of IDEA administrative remedies.

Back to Report