District Court dismisses IDEA claim because plaintiffs failed to exhaust administrative remedies under the IDEA for education-centric claim even though plaintiffs sought money damages.
Doe v. Central Bucks School District et al., 2024 WL 871336 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 29, 2024)
The school district provided specialized transportation to R.S., a kindergarten student diagnosed with autism who attended school in the district, on a bus for students with special needs. Also, the school district assigned an aide to ride the bus with the student to and from school. On the third day of school, the student recited and repeated dialog from the movie Toy Story to the aide. According to the complaint, the aide allegedly perceived the student’s recitation of dialog from the movie as disrespectful to her, and she struck the student in his head, face, chin and neck area. The student did not sustain any long-term physical injuries, but he is now fearful of riding the bus and suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder and an exacerbation of an anxiety disorder.
The family filed suit in federal court against the school district, transportation company and the aide individually, alleging various civil rights claims. In particular, the family alleged the defendants violated the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and denied the student a free appropriate public education. They also alleged the defendants violated the Rehabilitation Act (RA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by denying the student the benefits of safe school bus transportation because of his autism. The school district and bus company moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing in part that the IDEA claim should be dismissed because the family failed to exhaust their IDEA administrative remedies. The defendants also challenged the family’s RA and ADA claims on similar grounds, arguing the family essentially was raising an IDEA claim for the alleged denial of education-based benefits, cast in the guise of separate RA and ADA claims.
The District Court agreed with the defendants’ exhaustion argument and dismissed the IDEA claim without prejudice: “Our Court of Appeals requires we dismiss R.S.’s Individuals with Disabilities Education Act claim because R.S. failed to exhaust his administrative remedies under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act for his education-centric claim even though R.S. seeks money damages. We dismiss R.S.’s Individuals with Disabilities Education Act claim without prejudice.” Doe, 2024 WL 871336 at *6. As well, the court dismissed the family’s RA and ADA claims without prejudice:
R.S. alleges claimed educational benefit injuries as Rehabilitation Act and Americans with Disabilities Act discrimination claims. R.S. alleges the District and its Transportation entity denied R.S. “fair and safe treatment on school buses” and the “public school education program” benefit of “safe school bus transportation.” R.S. alleges the exact type of denied educational benefits our Court of Appeals requires children seek redress through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s administrative remedies.
Id., 2024 WL 871336 at * 7.
