Bradyn S. v. Waxahachie Indep. Sch. Dist.

Decision Date10 September 2019
Docket NumberCivil Action No. 3:18-CV-2724-L
Citation407 F.Supp.3d 612
Parties BRADYN S., b/n/f Justin & Megan S., Plaintiff, v. WAXAHACHIE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; Carrie Kazda, Individually and in her Official Capacity; Derrick Young, Individually and in is Official Capacity; and Mike Lewis, Individually and his Official Capacity, Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas

Jordan Andrew McKnight, Pro Hac Vice, Little Elm, TX, for Plaintiff.

Meredith Prykryl Walker, Laura Rodriguez McLean, Nona C. Matthews, Walsh Gallegos Trevino Russo & Kyle PC, Irving, TX, Darrell G-M Noga, Christopher Allen Klement, Brown Fox PLLC, Melinda L. Hogan, McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC, Sydnie Shimkus, Bell Nunnally & Martin, Dallas, TX, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Sam A. Lindsay, United States District Judge

Before the court are Defendant Carrie Kazda's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Original Complaint (Doc. 17), filed November 19, 2018; and Defendant Officers' Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12(b)(6) and Brief in Support (Doc. 19), filed November 21, 2018. After carefully considering the motions, briefs, responses, replies, pleadings, and applicable law, the court grants Defendant Carrie Kazda's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Original Complaint (Doc. 17); grants Defendant Officers' Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12(b)(6) and Brief in Support (Doc. 19); and grants Plaintiff's request to replead his section 19831 claims against these Defendants.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

On October 15, 2018, Plaintiff Bradyn S. ("Plaintiff" or "Bradyn S."), a minor, through his parents Justin and Megan S., filed the Original Complaint ("Complaint"), asserting a section 1983 claim against Defendants Carrie Kazda ("Kazda"), Derrick Young ("Officer Young"), and Mike Lewis ("Officer Lewis"), in their individual and official capacities.2 The allegations giving rise to the claim relate to an event that took place on March 3, 2017, at Felty Elementary School in the Waxahachie Independent School District ("WISD").

Bradyn S. is a student at Felty Elementary who has autism

and a speech impairment, and qualifies for special education services. Pl.'s Original Compl. ¶ 4.1. Bradyn S. has a history of engaging in serious behavioral incidents at school. During the 2014-2015 school year, his first year at Felty Elementary, Bradyn S. was involved in "a number of documented incidents of violent behavioral outbursts." Id. Between August 22, 2016, and October 11, 2016, Bradyn S. "engaged in at least [nine] serious documented behavioral incidents[,] including attempting to stab another student with a pencil, slapping another student with a ruler, hitting a staff member, hitting students, and spitting in another student[']s face." Id. ¶ 4.2. On September 28, 2016, Bradyn S. caused an incident that required the staff to restrain him, and "a use of restraint form was placed in his file." Id. During another one of these nine behavioral incidents, a classroom had to be evacuated. Id. In February 2017, "major disciplinary events occurred" on the following dates: February 8, 9, 15, 16, and 27. Id. ¶ 4.5. Each incident involved either self-harm, harm to students, harm to staff, or a combination of the three. Id.

On March 3, 2017, the day on which the incident at issue occurred, Bradyn S. allegedly engaged in four behavioral incidents documented by WISD, during which he attacked another student. Id. ¶ 4.9. These incidents culminated "in a major incident in which[,] after continuing to attack students and staff, [Bradyn S.'s] classroom was evacuated." Id. A teacher, Tracy Gooch ("Gooch"), called the Waxahachie Police Department and informed it that this type of incident had occurred "many times." Id. Bradyn S. was eight years old at the time. Id.

Officer Young, a City of Waxahachie police officer, "arrived at the classroom, confronted Bradyn S., took [him] down to the ground, pinned him to [the] ground, and restrained his hands [ ] while [he] screamed in agony and frustration for several minutes." Id. Kazda, principal at Felty Elementary School, "participated in the restraint of the child." Id. Neither Kazda nor Gooch initially informed the officers that Bradyn S. was an autistic child with a speech impairment, "even while the police [later] attempted to ask the child questions[,] that continued to exacerbate his already elevated emotional state." Id. ¶ 4.9. Officer Lewis, a lieutenant with the City of Waxahachie police department, "arrived and placed the child in handcuffs." Id. ¶ 4.9. The officers "then elicited that they were dealing with a special needs child." Id. ¶ 4.9. Bradyn S. contends that he "was taken through the school in handcuffs and brought to the school's office w[h]ere he remained in handcuffs for an extended period, and continued to be questioned by the police." Id. He contends that he "remained in handcuffs well after [his] mother had arrived and the emergency or any need had subsided." Id. Following this incident, Bradyn S. contends that, on March 16, 2017, he was hospitalized at the Dallas Behavioral Healthcare Hospital for eight days and treated for suicidal ideation

and aggression. Id. ¶ 4.11.

Based on the allegations relating to Defendants' participation in the March 3, 2017 incident, Plaintiff asserts a section 1983 claim against Kazda, Officer Young, and Officer Lewis in their official and individual capacities. In alleging this claim, Plaintiff sets forth the following allegations:

Plaintiff Bradyn S. has a constitutional right under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution to be free from unreasonable seizures and to be secure in his person and to maintain his bodily integrity against unreasonable assaults of his person.
Plaintiff Bradyn S. has a constitutionally protected liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment in personal security, bodily integrity and freedom from unjustified intrusions on his personal security, including bodily restraint and punishment without due process of law.
Defendants Derrick Young, Mike Lewis[,] and Carrie Kazda acting under color of state law, regulation, custom or usage in their capacity as Waxahachie police officers and an employee of WISD respectively deprived Plaintiff of his constitutional rights when they caused, and participated in Plaintiff's seizure with unjustified and unreasonable force; Defendants acted with deliberate indifference to the risk of harm to Plaintiff Bradyn S.[ ]
Defendants Derrick Young[,] Mike Lewis and Carrie Kazda's actions, as described above, were objectively unreasonable, willful and wanton, in light of the facts and circumstances.
As a result of Defendants' unconstitutional action and/or omission Plaintiff has been injured and harmed in the form of stress, anxiety, and emotional damage[,] and/or has otherwise been harmed and is entitled to compensation.

Pl.'s Compl. ¶¶ 7.2-7.6.

On November 19, 2018, Kazda filed her Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Original Complaint (Doc. 17). With respect to the section 1983 claim asserted against her in her official capacity, Kazda asserts that Bradyn S. has failed to sufficiently plead facts supporting a municipal liability claim against WISD "[b]ecause an official capacity suit is treated as a claim against the governmental entity," thus "[Bradyn S.]'s constitutional claims against [ ] Kazda in her official capacity require [Bradyn S.] to establish municipal liability." Kazda Mot. to Dismiss 9-10. With respect to the section 1983 claim asserted against her in her individual capacity, she argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity because "it is not clearly established that she is unable to participate in the restraint of a student who engaged in behavior requiring the evacuation of his classroom." Id. at 13. Kazda further argues that Bradyn S. "cannot maintain a substantive due process claim under the Fourteenth Amendment stemming from [Kazda's] participation in [his] restraint" as his claim is cognizable under the Fourth Amendment, not the Fourteenth. Id. at 7. Accordingly, Kazda asserts that the Fourth Amendment is the sole constitutional basis upon which Bradyn S. may assert his section 1983 claim.

On November 21, 2018, Officer Young and Officer Lewis (collectively, the "Officers") jointly filed their Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12(b)(6) on similar grounds as those set forth in Kazda's motion. With respect to the section 1983 claim asserted against them in their official capacities, they contend that Bradyn S. has failed to plead a municipal liability claim against the City of Waxahachie (the "City"), which is required to assert a claim against the Officers in their official capacity. With respect to the section 1983 claim asserted against them in their individual capacities, they assert a qualified immunity defense and argue that Bradyn S. has failed to adequately plead that their actions on March 3, 2017, were objectively unreasonable in light of clearly-established law. As Kazda similarly argues, Young and Lewis further assert that Bradyn S. has not sufficiently pleaded facts to establish a cognizable substantive due process claim under the Fourteenth Amendment that is separate and distinct from his excessive use of force claim under the Fourth Amendment, and, on that basis, the court should dismiss Bradyn S.'s section 1983 claim to the extent it relies on the Fourteenth Amendment.

II. Standards
A. Rule 12(b)(6) – Failure to State a Claim

To defeat a motion to dismiss filed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a plaintiff must plead "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face."

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) ; Reliable Consultants, Inc. v. Earle , 517 F.3d 738, 742 (5th Cir. 2008) ; Guidry v. American Pub. Life Ins. Co. , 512 F.3d 177, 180 (5th Cir. 2007). A claim meets the plausibility test "when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Mendez v. Jones
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • September 22, 2021
    ...that, if proved, would show that the official's conduct violated clearly established constitutional or statutory rights.” Bradyn, 407 F.Supp.3d at 624 (N.D. Tex. 2019); May v. City of Arlington, Texas, 398 F.Supp.2d 85 (N.D. Tex. 2019). For a right to be clearly established, “[t]he contours......
  • Elliott v. Tucker
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas
    • November 29, 2022
    ...the claim because it is deemed a claim against the entity itself, in this case the ISD. Bradyn S. v. Waxahachie Indep. Sch. Dist., 407 F.Supp.3d 612, 617 n.2 (N.D. Tex. 2019). Here, Elliott has not pleaded that there was an ISD policy, custom, or procedure that resulted in the deprivation o......
  • Elliott v. Tucker
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas
    • November 29, 2022
    ... ... 2003) (citing Leffall v. Dall ... Indep. Sch. Dist. , 28 F.3d 521, 524 (5th Cir. 1994)) ... Bradyn ... S. v. Waxahachie Indep. Sch. Dist., 407 ... ...
  • Ashley G. ex rel. M.G. v. Copperas Cove Indep. Sch. Dist.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas
    • December 9, 2020
    ...of a child's special education status does not inherently make the use of restraint unreasonable. See Bradyn S. v. Waxahachie Indep. Sch. Dist., 407 F. Supp. 3d 612, 627 (N.D. Tex. 2019) (school principal and local police placed an autistic child in a restraint with the assistance of the po......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT