A.F. Ex Rel. Christine B. v. Española Public Schools, 801 F.3d 1245

Background

A.F., a student with learning disabilities, and her mother Christine B. filed an IDEA due-process complaint against Española Public Schools alleging failures to evaluate and provide an appropriate program.
The parties mediated and entered a written settlement agreement resolving the IDEA claims; Christine B. then moved to dismiss the administrative complaint with prejudice, which the state agency granted.
Christine B. later sued in federal court under the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act (Section 504), and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging essentially the same facts as in the IDEA complaint.
The district court dismissed the federal suit for failure to exhaust IDEA administrative remedies under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(2)(A) and § 1415(l).
The Tenth Circuit (lead opinion by Gorsuch) affirmed, holding that § 1415(l) requires exhaustion of subsections (f) and (g) ‘‘to the same extent’’ as an IDEA civil action — and a mediated settlement that produced dismissal with prejudice prevents a plaintiff from qualifying as "aggrieved" and thus from bringing the civil action.
The dissent (Briscoe) argued a mediated settlement should constitute exhaustion because Congress intended mediation/preliminary resolution to be a viable means to resolve IDEA complaints and exhaustion should not force a claimant to forgo settlement to preserve later federal claims.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 1415(l) exhaustion applies to plaintiff's ADA/Rehab/§1983 claims	Christine B.: mediation/preliminary meeting satisfies IDEA exhaustion; no appeal available after settlement	School: §1415(l) applies because the federal claims seek relief also available under IDEA and plaintiff did not become an "aggrieved" party after settlement	Held: §1415(l) applies; plaintiff failed to exhaust because settlement + dismissal with prejudice precludes being "aggrieved" by administrative findings/decision
Whether a mediated settlement equates to exhaustion of subsections (f) and (g)	Christine B.: mediation is an authorized §1415(e) procedure and thus exhausts (f) and (g)	School: statute requires exhaustion "to the same extent" as for an IDEA civil action, which requires being "aggrieved" by administrative findings/decision — mediation + dismissal forecloses that	Held: Mediation does not satisfy the exhaustion requirement where plaintiff seeks relief also available under IDEA and has dismissed administrative proceedings with prejudice
Whether futility or other exceptions excuse exhaustion here	Christine B.: (later) argued futility because settlement provided all IDEA relief	School: plaintiff never raised futility before judgment; no valid excuse for failing to exhaust	Held: Court refused to consider futility because it was not timely presented below and plaintiff gave no excuse for earlier omission
Whether dismissal on pleadings or remand for factual development was required	Christine B.: district court should have allowed discovery to develop exhaustion facts	School: failure to exhaust is clear from pleadings and incorporated documents	Held: Court affirmed dismissal on the pleadings; exhaustion can be decided as a matter of law where record shows failure to exhaust

Key Cases Cited

Smith v. Robinson, 468 U.S. 992 (1984) (Supreme Court opinion prompting Congress to clarify IDEA’s relationship to other federal remedies)
Padilla ex rel. Padilla v. Sch. Dist. No. 1, 233 F.3d 1268 (10th Cir. 2000) (test whether §1415(l) applies: could IDEA administrative remedies redress the alleged injuries to any degree)
Cudjoe v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 12, 297 F.3d 1058 (10th Cir. 2002) (damages are ordinarily unavailable in IDEA administrative proceedings)
Ellenberg ex rel. S.E. v. New Mexico Military Inst., 478 F.3d 1262 (10th Cir. 2007) (§1415(l) inapplicable where IDEA could offer no relief)
Muskrat ex rel. J.M. v. Deer Creek Pub. Schs., 715 F.3d 775 (10th Cir. 2013) (futility exception where parties already obtained all relief IDEA could provide)
Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305 (1988) (recognition of traditional futility exception to exhaustion in related educational context)
Weber v. Cranston Sch. Comm., 212 F.3d 41 (1st Cir. 2000) (exhaustion required where due process hearing was never initiated; mediation there was not shown to be a successful written settlement)
Allen v. Zavaras, 568 F.3d 1197 (10th Cir. 2009) (exhaustion may be decided on pleadings when failure to exhaust is clear as a matter of law)
U.S. Nat. Bank of Or. v. Indep. Ins. Agents of Am., Inc., 508 U.S. 439 (1993) (scrivener's error doctrine referenced regarding departures from statutory text)
Bd. of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys. v. Dimension Fin. Corp., 474 U.S. 361 (1986) (courts should not displace Congress’s textually expressed compromise based on policy preferences)