535 F. App'x 405
5th Cir.2013Background
- A.M., a high‑school student with an anxiety disorder, transferred in 2011 from Episcopal to Dunham School to receive individualized academic accommodations; both are private LHSAA member schools.
- LHSAA enforces a transfer rule rendering students who transfer within the same residence zone ineligible for athletics for one year; A.M. sat out six football games in 2011 under that rule.
- Mann (A.M.’s father) sought an exemption from LHSAA; it was denied; Mann sued under the ADA in federal court seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of the remaining ineligibility (first four games of 2012 season).
- The district court granted a preliminary injunction enjoining LHSAA from treating A.M. as ineligible and from applying its “restitution rule” (which would vacate records/forfeit wins if a later court order is reversed) against A.M. or Dunham if the injunction were later vacated.
- On appeal, the Fifth Circuit considered whether Mann showed a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of an ADA claim (i.e., that A.M. is disabled under the ADA) and whether the injunction was properly issued; the court reversed and vacated the preliminary injunction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether LHSAA is subject to the ADA (Title II) | LHSAA’s conduct is state action; ADA applies | LHSAA contends it is not a public entity subject to Title II | Court assumed arguendo that LHSAA is a public entity and treated jurisdiction as intertwined with merits; did not decide definitively |
| Whether A.M. is disabled under the ADA | Mann: A.M. has an anxiety disorder that substantially limits major life activities (learning, concentrating, thinking, working); relied on Dr. Lawson’s reports and IDEA classification | LHSAA: A.M. is not substantially limited in a major life activity; diagnosis alone is insufficient; ADA requires showing of substantial limitation distinct from IDEA | Court held Mann failed to show a substantial likelihood of success because the record (Dr. Lawson’s report) did not demonstrate how A.M. is substantially limited in a major life activity under the ADA |
| Whether transfer was because of disability (causation for ADA claim) | Mann: Transfer motivated by need for accommodations related to his anxiety disorder | LHSAA: Transfer not shown to be because of a disability sufficient under ADA standards | Because Mann failed the disability showing, court did not find likelihood of success on causation; remanded for further proceedings if pursued at trial |
| Validity/application of LHSAA’s restitution rule after injunction | Mann: Restitution rule is retaliatory and should not be applied to A.M./Dunham if injunction later vacated | LHSAA: Rule is meant to restore competitive fairness if an injunction is later reversed | Court reversed the district court’s injunction including the prophylactic bar on applying the restitution rule and vacated the entire injunction (rule not yet applied; vacated because injunction was erroneous) |
Key Cases Cited
- Clark v. Tarrant Cnty., 798 F.2d 736 (5th Cir. 1986) (ADA both conveys jurisdiction and creates a cause of action)
- La. High Sch. Athletic Ass’n v. St. Augustine High Sch., 396 F.2d 224 (5th Cir. 1968) (LHSAA conduct is state action)
- Toyota Motor Mfg., Ky., Inc. v. Williams, 534 U.S. 184 (2002) (discusses requirement that impairment substantially limit major life activities)
- PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin, 532 U.S. 661 (2001) (ADA forbids discrimination in public life; relevance to athletic participation)
- Ellenberg v. New Mexico Military Inst., 572 F.3d 815 (10th Cir. 2009) (distinguishes IDEA and ADA disability definitions)
- Janvey v. Alguire, 647 F.3d 585 (5th Cir. 2011) (standards for preliminary injunction review)
- McPherson v. Mich. High Sch. Athletic Ass’n, Inc., 119 F.3d 453 (6th Cir. 1997) (eligibility disputes and restitution rules can keep controversies live for appeal)