Harrison v. Jefferson Parish Sch. Bd.
| Decision Date | 21 November 2020 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION CASE NO. 20-2916 |
| Citation | 502 F.Supp.3d 1088 |
| Parties | Nyron HARRISON, et al. v. JEFFERSON PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana |
Chelsea B. Cusimano, Douglas R. Kraus, Brener Law Firm, LLC, Susannah C. McKinney, Brener & Kraus, LLC, New Orleans, LA, for Nyron Harrison, Thelma Williams.
Eve B. Masinter, Ernst Fredrick Preis, Jr., Matthew M. McCluer, Breazeale, Sachse & Wilson, L.L.P., New Orleans, LA, for Jefferson Parish School Board, Patricia Adams, James Gray, Cecily White, Terri Joia.
SECTION: "G"(2)
AMENDED ORDER AND REASONS11
Before the Court is Plaintiffs Nyron Harrison and Thelma Williams’ ("Plaintiffs") "Motion for Partial Remand of Summary Proceedings, and for Remand of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order."2 In this litigation, Plaintiffs bring suit, individually and on behalf of their minor son Ka'Mauri Harrison ("Ka'Mauri"), against the Jefferson Parish School Board, Dr. James Gray, Cecily White, Terri Joia, and Patricia Adams (collectively, "Defendants"), alleging injuries resulting from Ka'Mauri's suspension for displaying a BB gun on camera during remote learning.3 After Plaintiffs filed the case in the 24th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Jefferson, Defendants removed the case to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1367.4 In the instant motion, Plaintiffs argue that the summary proceedings seeking a writ of mandamus directing the School Board to hear an appeal of the suspension or, alternatively, judicial review of the suspension pursuant to Louisiana Revised Statute § 17:416 should be remanded to state court.5 Considering the motion, the memoranda in support and in opposition, the record, and the applicable law, the Court denies the motion.
Plaintiffs’ claims arise out of an incident that occurred on September 11, 2020, while Ka'Mauri was engaged in remote learning for Woodmere Elementary School ("Woodmere"), a school within the Jefferson Parish School System.6 Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Plaintiffs enrolled three of their children in distance learning.7 On September 11, 2020, Ka'Mauri, a nine year old fourth grade student at Woodmere, was receiving virtual instruction at home in his bedroom.8 Plaintiffs claim that Ka'Mauri shares his bedroom with his younger brothers.9 Plaintiffs allege that, while Ka'Mauri was taking a diagnostic assessment, he picked up a BB gun that his younger brother had tripped over and moved it away from his brother.10 According to Plaintiffs, Ka'Mauri was unaware that the BB gun was in view of the camera on his computer screen.11 Plaintiffs contend that Ka'Mauri never pointed the BB gun at the camera, and was only trying to remove it from the path of his younger brother when he picked it up.12
Plaintiffs allege that Ka'Mauri's teacher, Leslie Williams, witnessed the incident at issue.13 According to the Petition, Leslie Williams tried to get Ka'Mauri's attention when she saw the BB gun, but Ka'Mauri could not hear her because he had muted the computer while he was taking the assessment.14 Allegedly because Leslie Williams thought she saw a real gun, she reported the incident to Woodmere's principal, Cecily White ("White").15 Plaintiffs allege that White signed a Behavior Report on September 14, 2020, suspending Ka'Mauri from Woodmere from September 16, 2020 through September 29, 2020 and recommending Ka'Mauri for expulsion.16 Plaintiffs assert that White never met with Ka'Mauri or spoke to him about the incident.17
On September 16, 2020, Plaintiffs claim that they were given a "Woodmere School Expulsion Recommendation," in which Ka'Mauri was recommended for expulsion for violating the Jefferson Parish School System's policy against possessing "weapons prohibited under federal law."18 Plaintiffs claim that the recommendation letter stated that Ka'Mauri would be suspended pending an expulsion hearing, yet, after receiving the letter, they were given no further information on any rules applicable to the hearing or a date for the hearing.19
On September 21, 2020 at 10:17 AM, Plaintiffs allegedly received notice via text message that the expulsion hearing would take place the next day—September 22, 2020 at 9:00 AM.20 However, Plaintiffs assert that they were not given information on the laws or procedures to be used at the hearing, any witness statements, or Ka'Mauri's student file.21 Plaintiffs claim that they only received information on the policies and procedures of the Jefferson Parish School System and the protocol for student expulsions later that day, at the insistence of their attorney.22 Plaintiffs contend that they did not receive any information on policies or procedures in place relating specifically to virtual learning, as the Jefferson Parish School System had no such policies in place, or witness statements taken from Ka'Mauri's classmates.23
Plaintiffs allege that the expulsion hearing took place on September 22, 2020.24 Plaintiffs claim that the following individuals were present at the hearing: Plaintiffs; Principal White; the Hearing Officer, Terri Joia ("Joia"); Ka'Mauri's teacher, Leslie Williams; the Behavior Interventionist, Stacie Trepagnier; and Plaintiffs’ counsel.25 Plaintiffs allege that Joia referred to Louisiana Revised Statute § 17:416 (" Section 17:416") as the statute governing procedures for the hearing.26 Plaintiffs allege that their counsel objected throughout the hearing, alleging violations of due process.27 Plaintiffs contend that, throughout the hearing, Joia assured Plaintiffs that they would have a right to appeal the outcome of the hearing.28
Plaintiffs claim that they received an email on September 23, 2020, stating that Ka'Mauri was found "guilty of displaying a facsimile weapon while receiving virtual instruction," and Ka'Mauri would be subject to a six day suspension and social work assessment.29 Plaintiffs allege that they then requested an appeal of the outcome, but were told that there was no right to appeal a suspension under Section 17:416, but instead, that the right to appeal only attaches for expulsions.30 Plaintiffs assert that there is a right to appeal when there is a recommendation of expulsion, as occurred in the instant case.31 Plaintiffs contend that their request for an appeal was denied by the School Board.32
Plaintiffs allegedly informed Defendants that Joia told Plaintiffs they had a right to appeal, and Patricia Adams ("Adams"), Chief Legal Counsel for the Jefferson Parish School System, responded by stating that "Ms. Joia is not an attorney" and that she "may have misstated the law."33 Plaintiffs further allege that the Attorney General of Louisiana issued a letter on September 29, 2020, explaining that the right to appeal a hearing officer's decision when a student is recommended for expulsion is "clear and unambiguous."34 When presented with this letter, Plaintiffs claim that Adams maintained that Attorney General Landry also misstated law.35
On October 2, 2020, Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of Ka'Mauri, filed a "Petition for Judicial Review, and Alternatively, a Writ of Mandamus" ("Petition") against Defendants in the 24th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana.36
In the Petition, Plaintiffs seek mandamus relief directing the School Board to hear an appeal or, alternatively, judicial review of Ka'Mauri's suspension under Section 17:416 (the "Summary Proceedings").37 Plaintiffs contend that, under Section 17:416, the School Board has a nondiscretionary duty to review a disciplinary proceeding if requested by parents of a student recommended for expulsion.38 Plaintiffs assert that the School Board refused to perform this duty, and they seek a writ of mandamus directing the School Board to hear the appeal.39 Alternatively, Plaintiffs assert that the School Board "implicitly affirmed the findings" made by Joia during the expulsion hearing.40 Therefore, Plaintiffs alternatively seek judicial review of that decision.41
Plaintiffs also bring claims for alleged violations of Ka'Mauri's procedural and substantive due process rights under both the Louisiana Constitution and the U.S. Constitution.42 Plaintiffs federal claims are brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985.43 Finally, Plaintiffs bring Louisiana state law tort claims against Defendants including: a defamation claim against White; a detrimental reliance claim against the School Board, White, Superintendent Gray, and Adams; an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, or alternatively a negligent inflection of emotional distress claim, against all Defendants; and a negligence claim against the School Board, Superintendent Gray, and Adams.44 Plaintiffs seek damages for mental pain and suffering, future counseling and tutoring, lost income, economic damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs.45
On October 6, 2020, Plaintiffs filed a "Petition for TRO/Injunction" ("TRO Petition") in the 24th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana, seeking to enjoin Defendants from subjecting Ka'Mauri to a social work assessment.46 The state court granted a temporary restraining order on October 6, 2020, and a preliminary injunction hearing was scheduled in state court for November 4, 2020.47
On October 16, 2020, Plaintiffs filed a "First Supplemental and Amending Petition" alleging that Defendants retaliated against Plaintiffs for engaging in constitutionally protected speech.48
Defendants removed the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana on October 26, 2020.49 Defendants removed the case to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1367, alleging federal question jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims arising under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985, and supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims.50
On November 5, 2020, Defendants filed a "Motion to...
To continue reading
Request your trial