Micah Fialka-Feldman v. Oakland University Board of Trustees
639 F.3d 711
| 6th Cir. | 2011Background
- In December 2009, the district court granted a permanent injunction requiring Oakland University to provide housing to Micah Fialka-Feldman.
- Fialka-Feldman has mild cognitive disabilities and attended Oakland via the OPTIONS program; he sought on-campus housing and was denied as not an admitted OU student.
- OU complied with the injunction, and Fialka-Feldman moved into a dormitory in January 2010 while the case proceeded.
- In 2010, he completed the OPTIONS program and left the university in April 2010 with no plans to return, turning the live controversy into a moot one.
- The University appealed the injunction; damages were not cross-appealed; attorney’s-fee award to Fialka-Feldman was stayed pending appeal; the appeal subsequently became moot and the case was considered for dismissal and vacatur.
- The appellate court ultimately vacated the district court’s judgment, dismissed the appeal as moot, and remanded to the district court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the appeal moot after Feldman completed the program? | Fialka-Feldman contends there remains a live dispute. | OU argues mootness applies since no live controversy remains. | Yes; the appeal is moot and must be dismissed. |
| Whether a standalone public-interest exception sustains mootness. | Public interest warrants a live ruling despite mootness. | There is no freestanding public-interest mootness exception. | No standalone public-interest exception to mootness exists. |
| Whether the case fits the capable-of-repetition, yet-evading-review doctrine. | Case should be preservable under the capable-of-repetition exception. | The exception does not apply as Feldman completed the program. | Not applicable; the case does not fall within the exception. |
| Whether vacatur of the district court judgment was appropriate. | N/A. | N/A. | Vacatur appropriate to permit potential relitigation of the issues. |
Key Cases Cited
- DeFunis v. Odegaard, 416 U.S. 312 (1974) (discussed mootness; graduation can moot future review)
- Munsingwear, Inc. v. United States, 340 U.S. 36 (1950) (mootness: vacate and dismiss when no relief can be granted)
- Lewis v. Cont’l Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472 (1990) (even fees or other ancillary issues do not create jurisdiction when no live case)