Stanek v. St. Charles Community Unit School District No. 303

783 F.3d 634 (2015)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Stanek v. St. Charles Community Unit School District No. 303

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
783 F.3d 634 (2015)

  • Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD

Facts

Matthew Stanek (plaintiff) was the son of Bogdan and Sandra Stanek (parents) (plaintiffs) and a student in the St. Charles Community Unit School District No. 303 (district) (defendant). Matthew was autistic and considered disabled under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and the district provided Matthew with an individualized education program (IEP). With accommodations, Matthew excelled in school, earning high grades and taking advanced classes. However, during Matthew’s junior year, teachers began refusing to give Matthew accommodations, failing to follow Matthew’s IEP, and pressuring Matthew to drop out of advanced courses. Without the accommodations, Matthew received failing grades. Matthew’s parents attempted to meet with the school to discuss the situation, but teachers began negatively altering Matthew’s grades, dodging meetings with his parents, and refusing requests for academic records. The district attempted to conduct its required periodic special-education evaluation for Matthew, but Matthew’s parents refused to give consent. The district requested an administrative hearing to overrule the consent requirement, and Matthew and his parents each filed complaints alleging that the district and several individuals had violated federal disability laws. The hearing officer dismissed the family’s complaints on procedural grounds. The family members each filed suit in state court, alleging violations of the IDEA, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the Rehabilitation Act. Matthew was 19 at the time of filing and had signed a delegation-of-rights form. The district removed the case to federal court. The court dismissed the family’s claims, and the family appealed to the Seventh Circuit.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Wood, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 741,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 741,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 741,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership