Salt Lake City School District

United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2025 · Torts

TortsIDEAADARehabilitation Actspecial education placementleast restrictive environmentIDEAADA Title II

Facts

The Salt Lake City School District adopted a "hub" system that consolidated elementary students with intellectual disabilities into designated schools, assigning students labeled mild/moderate to three schools and students labeled severe to four schools. According to the complaint, the District categorized students solely by IQ and assigned them to these programs without considering each student's individual needs or meaningfully considering placement in general education with supplementary aids and services. E.J. was placed in a mild/moderate self-contained class at a hub school, and H.S. was assigned to a severe-disabilities hub school before his IEP was fully developed. Plaintiffs alleged the system was designed for efficiency in service delivery and transportation rather than individualized placement decisions.

Issue

Whether plaintiffs plausibly stated claims under the IDEA, Title II of the ADA, and Section 504 by alleging that the District's hub system categorically assigns intellectually disabled students to self-contained special education classes without individualized placement determinations. The court also considered whether the Section 504 claim had to be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Rule

Under the IDEA, educational placement decisions must be individualized, based on the child's IEP, and made with consideration of the continuum of alternative placements, including education with nondisabled children to the maximum extent appropriate; a district plausibly violates the IDEA by predetermining placement or categorically assigning students based on disability classifications rather than individual needs. Under the IDEA's exhaustion requirement, a plaintiff need not exhaust a non-IDEA claim when exhaustion would be futile, such as where the administrative officers would clearly dismiss that claim for lack of jurisdiction. ADA and Section 504 claims are governed by similar substantive standards and may be plausibly stated by alleging denial of equal opportunity to participate in educational services and denial of services in the most integrated appropriate setting.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

A public school district in Columbus, Ohio created a policy under which all elementary students with Down syndrome are assigned to one of two self-contained programs based solely on a district checklist score. At IEP meetings, staff tell parents that regular-class placement with in-class supports is not discussed because the district has already decided those students belong in the centralized programs.

If parents sue at the pleading stage, which is the strongest analysis of their IDEA claim?

Explanation. The majority held that a complaint plausibly states an IDEA claim when it alleges the district categorically assigns students based on disability classification instead of making individualized educational placement determinations based on each child’s IEP and considering the continuum of placements, including regular classes with supplementary aids and services. The claim survives dismissal even though the plaintiffs have not yet proved the facts. (Derived from Salt Lake City School District (n.d.).)