This paper addresses application of the Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies (the legal doctrine that a party may not seek judicial relief for supposed or threatened injuries until the prescribed administrative remedies have been exhausted), in relation to cases brought under the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (EHA). The study seeks to determine patterns in 95 administrative exhaustion cases dating between 1978 and 1988. The study concentrates on associations among years, court levels, plaintiff types, whether administrative exhaustion was required, which arguments were the most popular and successful in seeking exemption from administrative exhaustion, opinion writing style, and what issues were at stake. The study concludes that the development of EHA case law presents a picture of the exhaustion doctrine as an evolving, generally predictable guide that becomes more valuable as case law in subject-specific areas develops. Three out of five cases receive exemption from exhaustion requirements. While traditional exhaustion law forbids the consideration of the merits of the case prior to deciding whether to admit a case, the merits of these cases often constituted an integral, inseparable part of the decision-making process. Appendices contain over 100 citations to court cases and a copy of the survey form. (JDD)