Bailey v. Mansfield Indep. Sch. Dist.
Citation | 425 F.Supp.3d 696 |
Decision Date | 21 November 2019 |
Docket Number | Civil Action No. 3:18-cv-1161-L |
Parties | Stacy BAILEY, Plaintiff, v. MANSFIELD INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; Dr. Jim Vaszauskas; and Dr. Kimberly Cantu, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas |
Jason C.N. Smith, Law Offices of Jason Smith, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff.
Thomas E. Myers, Kevin C. Smith, Brackett & Ellis PC, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendants.
Before the court is Defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss and Brief in Support (Doc. 14), filed October 2, 2018. Having considered the motion, response, reply, pleadings, and applicable law, and for the reasons that follow, the court denies in part and grants in part Defendants' Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 14).
In this civil action, Plaintiff Stacy Bailey ("Bailey"), an elementary school art teacher employed by the Mansfield Independent School District ("Mansfield I.S.D."), asserts federal law claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law claims against Defendants Mansfield I.S.D.; its Superintendent, Dr. Jim Vaszauskas ("Superintendent Vaszauskas"); and its Associate Superintendent for Human Resources, Dr. Kimberly Cantu ("Dr. Cantu"). Bailey alleges Defendants violated her rights to equal protection and due process under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution by unlawfully discriminating against her because of her sexual orientation and status as a lesbian, including stigmatizing her, making false allegations that she was engaging in unprofessional acts, placing her on an eight-month administrative suspension, and eventually transferring her to a different school after she allegedly shared a photograph of her same-sex fiancé along with other family photographs with second-grade students and mentioned to her fourth-grade students that a certain artist was married to someone of the same sex. Bailey further alleges Defendants' actions burdened her constitutionally protected right to marry. In addition, Bailey brings state law claims against Defendants for alleged violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Texas Constitution, Article I, § 3, and the Texas Equal Rights Amendment, Article I, § 3a.
The court now sets out the allegations upon which it relies in deciding the pending motion to dismiss, accepting all well-pleaded facts in the complaint as true and viewing them in the light most favorable to Bailey. Sonnier v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. , 509 F.3d 673, 675 (5th Cir. 2007). The facts are drawn from Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint ("Complaint"), the live pleading. See First Am. Compl. (Doc. 13).
Bailey is a teacher with Mansfield I.S.D. who taught art for ten years at Charlotte Anderson Elementary School. Bailey "is lesbian/gay and was born that way." Id. ¶ 15. Mansfield I.S.D. repeatedly gave Bailey exemplary performance evaluations and, for two of her ten years, selected her as "Teacher of the Year." Bailey was open about her sexual orientation at work among her colleagues but never used sexual or mature terms with her students.
On August 23, 2017, while providing an introduction to a class in the form of a "First Day of School" PowerPoint, Bailey shared various photographs of her parents, her family, her "future wife," her best friends, and pictures of herself as a child in an effort to engage the students. "The photo of [Bailey's] future wife was an endearing photo of [her] and her future wife dressed as characters from the children's movie ‘Finding Nemo.’ " Id. ¶ 17. Bailey also showed her second-grade students slides providing class rules, rewards, and expectations for the year. Other teachers, administrators, and employees of Mansfield I.S.D. "who are heterosexual regularly mention their respective spouse[s] while in school, have photos of their famil[ies], fiancés and spouses in the work place, or reference their famil[ies], fiancés and spouse[s] as part of conversations with students, lessons, or other classroom-related interactions." Id. ¶ 14.
Later that week, the principal of Charlotte Anderson Elementary School informed Bailey that a parent complained to the school board and Superintendent Vaszauskas about her "promoting the ‘homosexual agenda’ by discussing her ‘future wife.’ " Id. ¶ 18. The principal stated, "I don't think you did anything wrong but I don't know what's going to happen." Id. On or about August 25, 2017, Dr. Cantu met with Bailey to discuss the parent's complaint, stating, "You can't promote your lifestyle in the classroom." Id. ¶ 19. Bailey responded, Id. Dr. Cantu responded, "Well right now it kind of is (a political statement)." Id. When Bailey inquired about changing policy to keep this from happening again, Dr. Cantu said, Id. ¶ 20. Dr. Cantu told Bailey she had done nothing wrong. That same evening, Bailey sent an e-mail to Mansfield I.S.D. requesting it enact a policy prohibiting discrimination against lesbians and gays.
Bailey had Id. ¶ 24. This mirrored her lesson plan for the prior year and "reflects a basic historical fact that is reflected in encyclopedic sources and federal publications, such as a study by the U.S. Department of the Interior." Id. Bailey also taught about other artists and their partners, including Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera. Id.
On September 8, 2017, Dr. Cantu took Bailey out of her class for a meeting and informed her that another parent had complained. Id. ¶ 23. This complaint was from the same parent who made the previous complaint. Id. Dr. Cantu explained to Bailey that the complaining parent stated Bailey had shown sexually inappropriate images to children and asked her to sign a document acknowledging that she had. Id. ¶ 25. Bailey did not show sexually inappropriate images to children and refused to sign the document. Id. Bailey stated to Dr. Cantu, Id.
Since September 8, 2017, Mansfield I.S.D. has punished Bailey by placing her on administrative leave for over eight months. Id. ¶ 26. On October 30, 2017, Mansfield I.S.D. asked Bailey for her resignation, but she refused to resign. Id. ¶ 28. On January 9, 2018, Dr. Cantu and Mansfield I.S.D.'s attorney Mike Leasor met with Bailey and suggested she had an "agenda." Bailey stated she had no agenda and was ready to go back to work at Charlotte Anderson Elementary. Id. ¶ 29. In late January 2018, Mansfield I.S.D. first indicated it might not renew Bailey's contract. Id. ¶ 30.
Beginning in February 2018, parents began to attend meetings of Mansfield I.S.D.'s Board of Trustees asking that Bailey be returned to the classroom because she was an outstanding teacher. This was embarrassing for Mansfield I.S.D. and Superintendent Vaszauskas. Id. ¶ 31.
On March 16, 2018, Bailey married her now-wife, Ms. Julie Vazquez. Id. ¶ 32. On March 27, 2018, Mansfield I.S.D., with the approval of its Board of Trustees and Superintendent Vaszauskas, issued an official statement for immediate release, id. ¶ 33, stating:
Defs.' Rule 12(b)(6) Mot. to Dismiss, Ex. A (Doc. 14) ("Mansfield I.S.D. Press Release").1
The Mansfield I.S.D. Press Release generated significant public outcry and press about Bailey's employment situation, including public discussions about her sexual orientation and employment status, as well as criticism of Mansfield I.S.D. Am. Compl. ¶ 41. It also coincided with a meeting...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Berry v. Tex. Woman's Univ.
...law. Instead, Plaintiff merely recited the same factual allegations in his First Amended Complaint. See Bailey v. Mansfield Indep. Sch. Dist. , 425 F. Supp. 3d 696, 724 (N.D. Tex. 2019) ("[T]he [Rule 7(a)] reply must be tailored to the assertion of qualified immunity and fairly engage its a......
-
Dixon v. Plano Indep. Sch. Dist.
...(5th Cir. 2010) (quoting Pineda v. City of Houston, 291 F.3d 325, 328 (5th Cir. 2002)); see also Bailey v. Mansfield Indep. Sch. Dist., 425 F.Supp.3d 696, at 713 (N.D. Tex. 2019) (“To state a claim under section 1983 against a school district, the complaint must allege sufficient factual co......
-
Martinez v. Wexford Health Servs., Inc.
...motion to dismiss stage, Plaintiff's group pleading—although not ideal—is not prohibited."); see also Bailey v. Mansfield Indep. Sch. Dist., 425 F. Supp. 3d 696, 713 (N.D. Tex. 2019) ("Although Defendants correctly note that Bailey, at times, lumps Defendants together as a group, read in th......