Supreme Court of the United States

Name: Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools
Author: Supreme Court of the United States

Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (2023)

Summary

“Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools”, published in 2023, is a work by Supreme Court of the United States. It explores elements such as Perez, Sturgis and remedies.

Quotes from Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (Supreme Court of the United States)

Supreme Court of the United States, Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (2023)

“ And it isn’t exactly difficult to imagine that a rational Congress might have sought to temper a demand for administrative exhaustion when a plaintiff seeks a remedy IDEA can supply with a rule excusing exhaustion when a plaintiff seeks a remedy IDEA cannot provide. * The parties pose a number of additional questions they would like us to answer—including whether IDEA’s exhaustion requirement is susceptible to a judge-made futility exception and whether the compensatory damages Mr. Perez seeks in his ADA suit are in fact available under that statute. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Supreme Court of the United States, Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (2023)

“ The statute’s administrative exhaustion requirement applies only to suits that “see [k] relief ... also available under” IDEA. And that condition simply is not met in situations like ours, where a plaintiff brings a suit under another federal law for compensatory damages—a form of relief everyone agrees IDEA does not provide.
Admittedly, our interpretation treats “remedies” (the key term in the first clause) as synonymous with the “relief” a plaintiff “seek [s] ” (the critical phrase found in the second clause) . ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Supreme Court of the United States, Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (2023)

“ Even on its own terms, it is unclear what the school district’s argument proves. Either interpretation of §1415 (l) operates to preclude some unexhausted claims. Under our view, for example, a plaintiff who files an ADA action seeking both damages and the sort of equitable relief IDEA provides may find his request for equitable relief barred or deferred if he has yet to exhaust §1415 (f) and (g) . Brief for United States as Amicus Curiae 22. It is “quite mistaken to assume,” too, that any interpretation of a law that does more to advance a statute’s putative goal “must be the law.” ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Supreme Court of the United States, Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (2023)

“ Perez’s ADA suit because it seeks relief for harms flowing from Sturgis’s alleged past shortcomings in providing a free and appropriate public education—a harm IDEA exists to address—and Mr. Perez chose to settle his administrative complaint rather than exhaust §1415 (f) and (g) ’s remedial processes.
If both views are plausible ones, we believe Mr. Perez’s better comports with the statute’s terms. Start with §1415 (l) ’s first clause. It focuses our attention on “remedies.” ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Supreme Court of the United States, Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (2023)

“ First, the statute sets forth this general rule: “Nothing in [IDEA] shall be construed to restrict” the ability of individuals to seek “remedies” under the ADA or “other Federal laws protecting the rights of children with disabilities.” Second, the statute offers a qualification, prohibiting certain suits with this language: “ [E] xcept that before the filing of a civil action under such [other federal] laws seeking relief that is also available under this subchapter, the procedures under subsections (f) and (g) shall be exhausted.” ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Supreme Court of the United States, Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (2023)

“ A “remedy” denotes “the means of enforcing a right,” and may come in the form of, say, money damages, an injunction, or a declaratory judgment. Black’s Law Dictionary 1320 (8th ed. 2004) ; see also 13 Oxford English Dictionary 584–585 (2d ed. 1991) (defining “remedy” as “ [l] egal redress”) . ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Supreme Court of the United States, Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (2023)

“ Ultimately, the district court agreed with Sturgis and dismissed the suit. Perez ex rel. Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, 2019 WL 6907138, *3–*4 (WD Mich. Dec. 19, 2019) . Bound by circuit precedent already addressing the question, the Sixth Circuit affirmed. Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, 3 F. 4th 236, 241 (2021) (citing Covington v. Knox Cty. School System, 205 F. 3d 912, 916–917 (CA6 2000) ) .
Whether §1415 (l) bars lawsuits like ours holds consequences not just for Mr. Perez but for a great many children with disabilities and their parents. ”

Supreme Court of the United States

Summary

Quotes from Luna Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools (Supreme Court of the United States)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature