McGovern v. Sullins, 81-1832
| Decision Date | 01 April 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-1832,81-1832 |
| Citation | 676 F.2d 98 |
| Parties | 4 Ed. Law Rep. 22 Meredith McGOVERN, an infant who sues by her next friends and parents, Patrick and Jody McGovern, Appellants, v. Howard O. SULLINS, Superintendent, Chesterfield County Public Schools; John B. Finkler, Director, Pupil Personnel Services, Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
Peter W. D. Wright, Richmond, Va., for appellants.
Henry B. Massie, Jr., Richmond, Va. (Frank B. Miller, III, Sands, Anderson, Marks & Miller, Richmond, Va., on brief), for appellees.
Before ERVIN and CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, District Judge.
Meredith McGovern, by her parents, appeals the district court's order dismissing her complaint against the superintendent of the Chesterfield County Public Schools for failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(1)(E). We affirm.
The McGoverns brought this action seeking injunctive relief under 20 U.S.C. § 1401 et seq., 29 U.S.C. § 794, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaining that the Chesterfield County schools had failed to provide their child with adequate educational services and that the procedures required by 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(1) (E) were not provided. Though several meetings were held among the parties, no formal complaint was ever filed by the McGoverns with the local agency.
Title 20 U.S.C. § 1401 note states that the purpose of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act is:
... to assure that all handicapped children have available to them ... a free appropriate public education which emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs ....
To accomplish this purpose Congress provides funds to local governing bodies to be used in special education. To insure that these funds are used properly, local education agencies must provide an "opportunity to present complaints with respect to any matter relating to the identification, evaluation or education placement of the child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education to such child." 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(1)(E). Parties aggrieved by decisions of local education agencies may appeal to the State Education Agency, 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c), and then to the state or federal court, 20 U.S.C. § 1415(e)(2).
The district court in dismissing the action focused on the language of § 1415 requiring "complaints with respect to any matter relating to" the providing of free appropriate public education to be brought first before the agency.
The two issues presented by this appeal are (1) whether the district court may exercise jurisdiction under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(e) before a plaintiff attacks the action of the school officials administratively and (2) assuming that jurisdiction is not proper under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(e) may a plaintiff proceed on the same facts with a § 1983 action with jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343.
Both of these issues have recently been...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Georgia State Conference of Branches of NAACP v. State of Ga.
...characterized the failure of a plaintiff to complete the administrative process as a jurisdictional defect. See, e.g., McGovern v. Sullins, 676 F.2d 98, 99 (4th Cir.1982). In addition, we have stated that "the function of a court under the [EAHCA] is, in the usual case, confined to that of ......
-
Marvin H. v. Austin Independent School Dist.
...§ 1983 is unavailable to enforce an EAHCA violation. See Anderson v. Thompson, 658 F.2d 1205, 1217 (7th Cir.1981); McGovern v. Sullins, 676 F.2d 98, 99 (4th Cir.1982); Powell v. Defore, 699 F.2d 1078, 1082 (11th ...
-
MR v. Milwaukee Public Schools, 80-C-592.
...must be exhausted before a claim under the EAHCA may be pursued in federal court, unless to do so would be futile. McGovern v. Sullins, 676 F.2d 98 (4th Cir. 1982); Riley v. Ambach, 668 F.2d 635 (2nd Cir.1981); Ezratty v. Puerto Rico, 648 F.2d 770, 774 (1st Cir.1981). The plaintiffs argue t......
-
Quackenbush v. Johnson City School Dist.
...administrative route, they should not be available under section 1983 when the administrative process is bypassed. See McGovern v. Sullins, 676 F.2d 98 (4th Cir.1982); see also Anderson v. Thompson, 658 F.2d at 1214-17 (because the EHA does not contain a damage remedy, section 1415 "cannot ......