260 P.3d 735
Or. Ct. App.2011Background
- C, a homeless student, enrolled as a 16-year-old freshman at Reynolds High School after his family returned from Mississippi.
- OSAA prohibits participation by students who are 19 or older at the start of the school year under its age rule.
- C requested a waiver; OSAA denied, and C appealed to the Oregon Board of Education, which concluded the McKinney-Vento Act required an exception balancing benefits and harms.
- OSAA sought judicial review, arguing the board’s ruling was incorrect and potentially sanctionable, while asserting mootness because C had graduated.
- The trial/appeals record showed C did not participate in OSAA activities during any period in which he was deemed ineligible under OSAA rules, due to the board’s ruling.
- The Oregon Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal as moot, as the relief sought would have no practical effect.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the appeal moot? | OSAA argues graduation renders the case moot and sanctions could follow if reversed. | The board contends mootness is not satisfied and potential preclusive effects could arise. | Appeal dismissed as moot. |
Key Cases Cited
- First Commerce of America v. Nimbus Center Assoc., 329 Or. 199 (1999) (mootness principles and justiciability)
- Blechschmidt v. Shatzer, 197 Or.App. 536 (2005) (timing of mootness and appeal standards)
- Kay v. David Douglas Sch. Dist. No. 40, 303 Or. 574 (1987) (standing and mootness considerations)
- Brumnett v. PSRB, 315 Or. 402 (1993) (mootness and finality guidance)
- Kerr v. Bradbury, 340 Or. 241 (2006) (supervisory review and mootness principles)
- Yancy v. Shatzer, 337 Or. 345 (2004) (capable-of-repetition, evading-review doctrine (distinguished in this case))
- OSAA v. Stout, 71 Or.App. 405 (1984) (preclusive effect considerations in administrative decisions)