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

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(l). In the decision below, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of petitioner’s claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)1 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, 137 S.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(l) requires exhaustion of a non-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(l) when such proceedings would be futile by virtue of settlement, or otherwise. 1 20 U.S.C. § 12101 et. seq.