The demands for accountability in education have led to an increase in high-stakes testing practices in public schools. Accountability can be seen at the high school level in the use of exit examinations (hereafter "exit exams") that students must pass to receive a diploma and graduate from high school. One of the most challenging issues regarding the use of exit exams has been how best to include students with disabilities (Johnson & Thurlow, 2003). The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; 1990) requires that students with disabilities participate in state and district-wide assessments, with appropriate accommodations and modifications when needed. Students with disabilities participate in these assessments in one of the following ways: (a) by taking the assessment with no modifications or accommodations, (b) by taking the assessment with modifications or accommodations, or (c) by taking an alternate assessment. Clearly, students with disabilities must participate in high stakes tests if required by the school district or state. The proper forum for determining how a student will participate in state or district-wide assessments is in a meeting of his or her individualized education program (IEP) team. This article examines litigation (i.e., due process hearings and court cases) in which high school exit exams and students with disabilities have been examined. To accomplish this, the authors (a) examine a few of the more important cases and hearings by the issues they addressed and (b) extrapolate implications from this litigation to help inform school district officials about their responsibilities when administering high-stakes tests to students with disabilities.