Emily Dehn sued the Board of Regents for Kansas Colleges and Universities in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, alleging disability discrimination and retaliation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and breach of implied and express contracts. The defendant moved to dismiss all claims under Rule 12(b)(6).
Factual Overview
Dehn enrolled in the University of Kansas Medical Center’s Nurse-Midwife Doctor of Nursing Practice program in 2019. She suffers from Ulcerative Colitis and Spondyloarthritis, which prevent her from traveling more than 45 minutes from home. The university initially approved accommodations for her disability in 2019, including flexible attendance and nearby clinical placements.
Despite these accommodations, the university assigned her to a clinical rotation nearly two hours from her home in 2022. When she complained, the program director criticized her and threatened disciplinary action. The university later told her she would need to either forfeit her accommodations or delay graduation. After further disputes about course requirements and project timelines, Dehn filed a discrimination complaint.
In October 2022, the parties entered into a settlement agreement. However, Dehn alleged the university subsequently breached this agreement through various actions, including colluding with a supposedly neutral grader, requiring additional credit hours contrary to the agreement, and failing to accommodate her disability needs after she moved to Colorado.
Legal Analysis
Settlement Agreement Release: The court first addressed whether the settlement agreement’s release provisions barred Dehn’s claims. While finding it could consider the settlement agreement at the motion to dismiss stage, the court determined that Dehn had plausibly alleged material breaches of the agreement by the university that could render the release provisions unenforceable.
Implied Contract Claims: The court found that Dehn’s implied contract claim failed because she did not first submit it to the Kansas Joint Committee on Special Claims as required by state law. This administrative exhaustion requirement was deemed a mandatory condition precedent to bringing such claims against state entities.
Express Contract Claims: For the express contract claim, the court held that it was barred because Dehn failed to bring it under the Kansas Judicial Review Act (KJRA), which provides the exclusive means for judicial review of state agency actions, including contract disputes. The claim fell outside the KJRA’s 30-day filing deadline.
The court granted the motion to dismiss regarding both contract claims but denied the motion to dismiss the ADA claims, allowing those to proceed.
Schrag on Law 