Miguel Luna Perez to sue Sturgis Public Schools for damages under ADA

Roman Martinez (left) of Latham & Watkins, who argued the case and Miguel Luna Perez in front of the Supreme Court. (Courtesy of Latham & Watkins)

The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 last week in favor of a 27-year-old Sturgis man seeking the right to sue Sturgis Public Schools for financial damages under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Miguel Luna Perez, a deaf man and former Sturgis student, claims the school district provided him an inadequate education by failing to assign him a qualified sign-language interpreter.

In an email statement to Watershed Voice after the court’s ruling on Monday, March 21, Perez’s attorney Roman Martinez said, “We are thrilled with today’s decision. The Court’s ruling vindicates the rights of students with disabilities to obtain full relief when they suffer discrimination. Miguel and his family look forward to pursuing their legal claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act.”

Martinez is a partner with the law firm Latham & Watkins. The National Association of the Deaf (NAD) and Disability Rights Michigan, along with the Law Office of Ellen Marjorie Saideman, served as co-counsel. 

Miguel Luna Perez, 2016 high school senior photo, Sturgis, Michigan. (Courtesy of Luna Perez family)

Perez immigrated to the United States with his family from Mexico in 2004, where he attended Sturgis Public Schools. In the official court filing Martinez stated, “Sturgis failed to provide Miguel with a qualified sign language interpreter at any point during his 12 years at Sturgis. Sturgis failed to provide Miguel with sufficient exposure to any language to enable him to acquire even basic proficiency in that language, whether it be ASL, Signed English, or English.”

Perez’s attorneys had previously filed a claim for a violation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) against Sturgis Public Schools, and reached a settlement that included providing financial support for Perez to attend Michigan School for the Deaf and receive other services. The settlement, however, did not determine whether the school district was liable for damages under a violation of the ADA. Perez’s attorneys filed a claim under the ADA seeking damages and the school district convinced federal courts to throw out the case, arguing Perez did not exhaust all of his processes with the IDEA. 

Perez appealed his case all the way to the Supreme Court. Martinez argued the first settlement did exhaust the IDEA process since that statute doesn’t provide for compensatory damages, but the ADA does. Meanwhile, attorneys for the school district argued that Perez’s claim involved his right to an adequate education, meaning it should begin — if not end — in the IDEA process. 

According to a report from the Associated Press, the justices ruled unanimously that Perez could pursue claims against Sturgis Public School District under the ADA. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in an eight-page opinion the case “holds consequences not just for Mr. Perez, but for a great many children with disabilities and their parents.” Gorsuch said they found nothing in the IDEA that would bar Perez from suing for ADA violations, and said Perez’s ADA lawsuit is seeking something that the IDEA cannot provide, which is compensatory damages. The case will now return to lower courts to determine whether Perez can win the damages he seeks.

Beca Welty is a staff writer and columnist for Watershed Voice.