Opinion ID: 778496
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Application to Scottie

Text: 41 The fact that Scottie has not been identified under the IDEA does not mean that relief for his claims is unavailable under the statute. He suffers from Epstein-Barr virus, which his doctor described as similar to mononucleosis, and which causes him debilitating fatigue if he sustains activity for even a short amount of time. This condition has not improved from fifth-grade to eleventh-grade, requiring him to receive homebound services for those years. He thus appears to be eligible under the IDEA as having an [o]ther health impairment, which the statute's regulations define as having limited strength [or] vitality ... that [i]s due to chronic or acute health problems ... and [a]dversely affects a child's educational performance. 34 C.F.R. § 300.7(c)(9)(i)-(ii). Appellant has not demonstrated that Scottie is ineligible under the IDEA, and Appellant states in her briefs that he has never been assessed [for IDEA eligibility]. Therefore, Appellant could have filed a complaint with the District pertaining to his identification or evaluation under the statute, and then utilized the IDEA's procedural machinery to address the alleged deficiencies in the provision of his FAPE. 11 42 Nor does the fact that Appellant seeks damages mean that relief under the IDEA is unavailable. On the face of the complaint, it is obvious that both the genesis and manifestation of Scottie's claims are educational in nature. Charlie F., 98 F.3d at 993. Appellant contests the District's removal of Scottie's teacher, Heath, at the end of the 1999-2000 school year and its decision to replace Heath with a teacher that Appellant found educationally incompatible with Scottie. Further, Appellant alleges that the District provided teaching materials in a tardy fashion, and that it created an intimidating environment at Scottie's IAP meetings by allowing persons not involved in his education to attend. These alleged injuries, of inadequate instruction, delayed teaching materials, and intimidation tactics at annual reviews, all share an educational source and educational consequences. We find these claims to be squarely within the scope of available relief under the IDEA. This appears to be the classic case where pursuing administrative procedures at the time of the alleged wrongdoing could have allowed the District to address and remedy any shortcomings in Scottie's education. 43 Finally, it is unclear whether Scottie has graduated from high school and, therefore, whether Appellant could claim that the District can no longer provide any educational remedy to him. Neither party has briefed the issue, and in any event, we conclude that relief was available to Scottie at the time of the alleged educational deficiencies and, therefore, that he was required to exhaust administrative procedures. 44 We therefore conclude that Appellant must exhaust administrative remedies under the IDEA for claims of educational deficiencies before seeking relief for those claims in a civil suit.