## Facts

- John M., a high school student with Down syndrome, attended Evanston Township High School in a public district receiving federal funds and subject to the IDEA.
- In middle school, John received special-education services under a May 2004 IEP; a co-teaching model (special-education and general-education teachers in the same classroom) was used in practice, though the IEP did not expressly require “co-teaching.”
- As John transitioned to high school, the high school district developed a new IEP and stated it would not provide the same co-teaching model used in middle school.
- John’s parents contested the new IEP through IDEA administrative procedures, asserting the district’s changes violated the stay-put provision by altering John’s then-current educational placement during the dispute.
- A state hearing officer ruled for the school district.
- The parents sued in federal court and obtained a preliminary injunction requiring restoration of a broader set of prior services associated with the middle school program, including co-teaching.
- The school district appealed the preliminary injunction; the appeal concerned interim stay-put relief, not the ultimate FAPE merits.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court correctly identified John’s “then-current educational placement” under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(j) when it ordered reinstatement of services associated with his middle school program.
2. Whether the preliminary injunction impermissibly went beyond maintaining placement by directing specific service-delivery methods and otherwise granting de facto merits relief.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit reversed the preliminary injunction and remanded.
- The court held the injunction could not stand because it addressed matters beyond stay-put and applied incorrect standards to the stay-put analysis.
- The court concluded the district court improperly treated particular service-delivery methods (including co-teaching) as the protected “placement,” despite the IEP’s lack of an express co-teaching requirement.

## Legal Principles

- IDEA’s stay-put provision, 20 U.S.C. § 1415(j), is a procedural protection intended to maintain stability by preventing unilateral changes to a child’s then-current educational placement during pending proceedings.
- “Then-current educational placement” generally refers to the operative placement reflected in the child’s IEP and overall program level, not every specific instructional methodology or implementation detail used by a prior school.
- A stay-put injunction must be limited to preserving the status quo placement; it may not be used to restructure a student’s program or to award interim relief that effectively decides substantive FAPE disputes.

## Conclusion

The Seventh Circuit reversed a stay-put preliminary injunction that required continuation of specific service methods beyond the student’s then-current educational placement, holding that § 1415(j) preserves placement during IDEA disputes but does not entitle a student to every prior implementation approach.


John M. ex rel. Christine M. v. Bd. of Educ. of Evanston Twp. High Sch. Dist. 202, 502 F.3d 708 (7th Cir. 2007)