Pollack v. Regional School Unit 75
660 F. App'x 1
| 1st Cir. | 2016Background
- B.P., a 17-year-old student with autism and language impairment, is nonverbal and attends Regional School Unit 75 under an IEP governed by the IDEA.
- Parents requested that B.P. wear an audio recording device at school so they could obtain information about his school day; the District denied the request based on an electronic device policy and classroom concerns.
- Parents filed a due process complaint (2012) alleging denial of reasonable accommodation under the ADA; an IDEA hearing officer denied the recording-device request.
- Parents sued in federal court asserting ADA, Section 504, and First Amendment claims; the district court granted summary judgment for the District, holding Parents had failed to exhaust IDEA administrative remedies under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(l).
- While this appeal was pending, Parents filed and prevailed at a second IDEA due process hearing (completed in June 2016), satisfying exhaustion; both parties agreed exhaustion was now met, rendering the appeal moot on that procedural ground.
- The First Circuit dismissed the appeal as moot, vacated the district court’s summary judgment as equitable relief, and remanded for consideration of the merits of the ADA, Section 504, and First Amendment claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether parents satisfied IDEA exhaustion requirement before pursuing ADA, §504, and First Amendment claims | Pollack: initial administrative proceeding sufficiently raised claims; exhaustion requirement satisfied or later cured | RSU 75: initial proceeding did not exhaust IDEA for B.P.’s personal substantive rights; suit premature | Appeal became moot after Parents obtained a second due process hearing; exhaustion is now satisfied |
| Whether appeal should be dismissed as moot and district court order left intact | Pollack: court should vacate the district court’s summary judgment and remand for merits consideration | RSU 75: dismiss appeal and leave summary judgment undisturbed | Court exercised equitable discretion to vacate district court’s summary judgment and remand for merits review |
| Whether vacatur is appropriate when appellant cures procedural deficiency during appeal | Pollack: vacatur appropriate because appellant acted to satisfy exhaustion, not to moot appeal strategically | RSU 75: favored leaving judgment intact (implicitly) | Vacatur granted—appellants did not deliberately moot appeal; equitable relief warranted |
| Remedy upon mootness where procedural hurdle was cured during appeal | Pollack: remand for merits after vacatur | RSU 75: maintain district court judgment | Court remanded for merits and ordered each side bear its own costs |
Key Cases Cited
- Kerkhof v. MCI Worldcom, Inc., 282 F.3d 44 (1st Cir. 2002) (vacatur is an equitable remedy; courts consider whether appellant deliberately mooted the appeal)
- U.S. Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall Partnership, 513 U.S. 18 (1994) (discusses principles governing vacatur of lower-court judgments when cases become moot)
- S.S. v. E. Ky. Univ., [citation="125 F. App'x 644"] (6th Cir. 2005) (vacatur and remand were appropriate where plaintiff satisfied IDEA exhaustion during pendency of appeal)