C.O. v. Portland Public Schools
679 F.3d 1162
9th Cir.2012Background
- C.O. was identified with special education needs in 1996; IEPs were developed and implemented by the District, but C.O. entered high school well behind grade level (about an 8th/3rd grade level) and was denied admission to the magnet high school.
- Oman, C.O.'s mother, obtained and reviewed records, but relations with the District deteriorated after initial requests and meetings.
- In 2004 Oman filed an administrative IDEA complaint; an administrative law judge found IDEA violations and ordered compensatory education, but the due to timing and provider availability, C.O. could not complete the remedy before graduation.
- Oman then filed multiple federal suits alleging roughly twenty IDEA procedural and substantive violations, plus claims under §1983 and claims alleging ADA/Rehabilitation Act violations tied to magnet admissions.
- The district court dismissed most claims; allowed nominal damages for three retaliatory acts, awarding $1; Oman and the District Bull appealed.
- The Ninth Circuit held that the IDEA does not provide a private right to nominal damages, and that relief under §1983 is constrained when the gravamen is an IDEA violation; it also held that monetary damages under the ADA/§504 Rehabilitation Act based on magnet admissions were not recoverable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether IDEA provides a private right of action for nominal damages | Oman seeks nominal damages under IDEA | District/Bull argue no private nominal-damages remedy under IDEA | No private nominal-damages remedy under IDEA |
| Whether §1983 relief is available when the IDEA is the gravamen of the claim | §1983 available for IDEA violation via private rights | Relief under §1983 limited if gravamen is IDEA remedy | Relief under §1983 limited to non-IDEA remediable claims; if IDEA governs, remedies are under IDEA |
| Whether ADA/§504 Rehabilitation Act monetary damages are recoverable for magnet admissions | Monetary damages under ADA/§504 for magnet-admissions policies | No private damages remedy for such ADA/§504 claims | No monetary damages under ADA/§504 for magnet-admissions policies; claims dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 U.S. 273 (2002) (private remedy under statutes with federal funds not implied without clear intent)
- Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275 (2001) (private damages remedies require explicit statutory intent)
- Blanchard v. Morton Sch. Dist., 509 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2007) (IDEA's comprehensive enforcement scheme excludes compensatory damages)
- Mountain View-Los Altos Union High Sch. Dist. v. Sharron B.H., 709 F.2d 28 (9th Cir. 1983) (IDEA does not disclose a damages remedy; relief often limited to appropriate remedies)