188 F. Supp. 3d 796
N.D. Ill.2016Background
- Plaintiff alleges deprivation of minor Allison W.’s rights under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and included Count III invoking 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to enforce those rights.
- Defendants (Oak Park and River Forest High School District #200 and Superintendent Steven Isoye) moved to dismiss Count III; their motion was noticed for presentment on June 1.
- Separate briefing was underway on Counts IV and V (previously Count II); defendants had also challenged those counts in an earlier-filed motion.
- Defendants relied on precedent from other circuits (notably A.W. v. Jersey City Pub. Schs.) arguing § 1983 cannot be used to enforce IDEA.
- Plaintiff relied on Seventh Circuit precedent in Stanek v. St. Charles (holding § 1983 can be an avenue to pursue remedies under IDEA) to oppose dismissal.
- The district court denied the motion to dismiss Count III, ordered defendants to answer all counts except IV and V by June 15, 2016, and left open the possibility of revisiting the § 1983 question later.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 1983 may be used to enforce IDEA rights | Stanek permits § 1983 as an avenue to pursue IDEA remedies | § 1983 cannot be used to enforce IDEA (as held by other circuits, e.g., A.W.) | Motion to dismiss Count III denied; district court follows Seventh Circuit precedent and leaves remedial/threshold issues for later |
Key Cases Cited
- Stanek v. St. Charles Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. 303, 783 F.3d 634 (7th Cir. 2015) (Seventh Circuit treated § 1983 as an available route to pursue IDEA remedies)
- A.W. v. Jersey City Pub. Schs., 486 F.3d 791 (3d Cir. 2007) (held § 1983 cannot be used to enforce IDEA)
- City of Rancho Palos Verdes v. Abrams, 544 U.S. 113 (2005) (Supreme Court decision cited as reason some circuits may revisit earlier precedent)
- Bartholet v. Reishauer A.G., 953 F.2d 1073 (7th Cir. 1992) (discussion criticizing multiplicitous pleading practices)
- NAACP v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., 978 F.2d 287 (7th Cir. 1992) (discussing pleading practices)