Moore Ex Rel. D.S. v. Kansas City Public Schools
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12493
| 8th Cir. | 2016Background
- D.S., a minor with intellectual disabilities, attended Southwest Early College Campus with an IEP; she had difficulty communicating, perceiving danger, and sometimes wandered.
- Southwest had many unused, supposed-to-be-locked areas; prior sexual assaults in locked areas had occurred and been investigated.
- While at school on April 1, 2014, D.S. was led through unsecured doors into an unsupervised area and raped by a male student; earlier in the year she had been repeatedly bullied, harassed, and assaulted.
- Moore (D.S.’s guardian) sued in Missouri state court for premises liability (missing/broken locks) and negligent supervision (failure to prevent/report bullying and sexual abuse), seeking damages for physical and emotional injuries.
- The school district and Southwest removed to federal court, arguing Moore’s claims arose under the IDEA and that IDEA exhaustion applied; the district court denied remand and dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative IDEA remedies.
- The Eighth Circuit reversed, holding the state-law tort claims did not necessarily raise a federal question under the IDEA and were not subject to IDEA exhaustion; remand to state court was ordered.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Moore’s state-law tort claims present a federal question allowing removal | Moore argued claims are state-law premises liability and negligent supervision for sexual assaults and do not seek IDEA relief | Defendants argued claims are substantively IDEA-based (IEP implementation/educational placement) and therefore federal jurisdiction and removal are proper | Court held the complaint did not necessarily raise a federal issue under the IDEA; remand required |
| Whether IDEA §1415(l) exhaustion applies to Moore’s state-law claims | Moore argued she sought only state-law damages and did not allege IDEA or other federal statute violations, so exhaustion is not required | Defendants argued exhaustion of IDEA administrative remedies is required because injuries relate to D.S.’s disability and IEP | Court held §1415(l) exhaustion does not reach state-law common-law claims that do not seek relief available under the IDEA |
| Whether references to the IEP convert the action into an IDEA claim | Moore contended limited IEP references merely showed notice of vulnerabilities, not a challenge to the IEP or educational placement | Defendants contended those references made the IEP the central dispute and thus implicate IDEA remedies | Court held isolated references to the IEP were insufficient to make IDEA the central issue; plaintiff may choose state-law claims |
| Whether attorney’s fees for improper removal are warranted | Moore sought fees under 28 U.S.C. §1447(c), claiming removal was objectively unreasonable | Defendants argued removal was colorable given IEP references and related injuries | Court held defendants had an objectively reasonable basis to remove, so fees were denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386 (well-pleaded complaint rule limits federal-question jurisdiction)
- Grable & Sons Metal Prods., Inc. v. Darue Eng’g & Mfg., 545 U.S. 308 (federal-question jurisdiction for state claims that necessarily raise substantial federal issues)
- Franchise Tax Bd. v. Constr. Laborers Vacation Tr., 463 U.S. 1 (federal jurisdiction and substantial federal issue analysis)
- Cent. Iowa Power Coop. v. Midwest Indep. Transmission Sys. Operator, Inc., 561 F.3d 904 (burden of establishing federal jurisdiction; doubts resolved for remand)
- M.P. ex rel. K. & D.P. v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 721, 439 F.3d 865 (IDEA-related claims and IEP process context)
- Payne v. Peninsula Sch. Dist., 653 F.3d 863 (non-IDEA claims not seeking IDEA relief are not subject to exhaustion)
- Martin v. Franklin Capital Corp., 546 U.S. 132 (standard for awarding fees for improper removal)