K.B. v. Fies

• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Indiana
• Writing for the Court: JUDGE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
• Decision Date: 05 May 2021
• Docket Number: CAUSE NO.: 2:17-CV-474-TLS
• Citation: K.B. v. Fies, CAUSE NO.: 2:17-CV-474-TLS (N.D. Ind. May 05, 2021)
• Parties: K.B. by guardian Suzanne Blade-Thompson, SUZANNE BLADE-THOMPSON, and JAMES BLADE, Plaintiffs, v. SAMUEL FIES, SCHOOL TOWN OF HIGHLAND, and RONALD W. FRAZIER, Defendants.

K.B. by guardian Suzanne Blade-Thompson, SUZANNE BLADE-THOMPSON,and JAMES BLADE, Plaintiffs, v. SAMUEL FIES, SCHOOL TOWN OF HIGHLAND, and RONALD W. FRAZIER, Defendants.

CAUSE NO.: 2:17-CV-474-TLS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA HAMMOND DIVISION

May 5, 2021

OPINION AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Defendant School Town of Highland's Motion for Summary Judgment as to All Counts Against It [ECF No. 104] and a Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 124], filed by Defendant Ronald W. Frazier. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the School Town of Highland's motion and GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Frazier's motion.

BACKGROUND

The Plaintiffs K.B. by guardian Suzanne Blade-Thompson, Suzanne Blade-Thompson, and James Blade filed their Complaint [ECF No. 6] against the Defendants Samuel Fies, the School Town of Highland (STOH), and Ronald W. Frazier in the Lake County, Indiana, Circuit Court on October 6, 2017. The case was removed to this Court on December 22, 2017. ECF No. 1. The Complaint alleges that, in 2010 and 2011, Fies, a teacher and athletic coach with STOH, targeted K.B. on a dating website. Compl. ¶¶ 17-23, ECF No. 6. At the time, K.B. was a special needs student in STOH with known mental disabilities and handicaps and was under eighteen years old; Fies was more than four years older than K.B. Id. at ¶¶ 15-17. Fies contacted K.B. through text messages, picture messages, telephone calls, and internet instant messaging services, sending and soliciting sexually explicit text messages and successfully soliciting telephonic masturbation. Id. at ¶¶ 22-23. When K.B. learned that she had been communicating with Fies, she became emotionally distressed and fearful, transferred to a different school district, and experienced severe mental, cognitive, and emotional damages. Id. at ¶¶ 34-35, 39; see also Ex. D at Nos. 17, 18, 19 (Pls.' Ans. to Interrog.), ECF No. 105-5.

In Counts I through XI, brought against Defendant Fies, K.B. alleges (1) Indiana state law claims based on criminal conduct that falls within the scope of the Crime Victims Relief Act as well as claims of personal injury, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and sexual harassment (Counts I through VII) and (2) federal claims of sexual exploitation, knowing receipt of child pornography, civil rights violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and a violation of Title IX (Counts VIII through XI).¹ Fies filed an Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Request for Trial by Jury [ECF No. 35] on February 16, 2018. These claims remain pending and are not the subject of either motion for summary judgment.

Against Defendant STOH, K.B. brings claims Counts XII through XV under (1) 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of her rights to equal access to education, equal protection, and due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, alleging that STOH failed to properly train and supervise its employees and that she was subject to harassment and a hostile educational environment on the basis of her gender and disability during her education as a result of Fies' alleged misconduct (Counts XII and XIII); (2) Title IX, alleging that STOH subjected her to a hostile educational environment based on her gender and disability (Count XIV); and (3) Indiana state law, alleging negligent hiring and retention of Fiesand negligent failure to have proper procedures and policies (Count XV). These counts are the subject of STOH's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 105].

Counts XVI and XVII are legal malpractice claims against K.B.'s former attorney, Defendant Ronald W. Frazier, brought by K.B. and by Blade-Thompson and Blade, respectively. These counts are the subject of Frazier's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 124].

SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD

Summary judgment is warranted when "the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). The movant may discharge this burden by "either: (1) showing that there is an absence of evidence supporting an essential element of the non-moving party's claim; or (2) presenting affirmative evidence that negates an essential element of the non-moving party's claim." Hummel v. St. Joseph Cnty. Bd. of Comm'rs, 817 F.3d 1010, 1016 (7th Cir. 2016) (citation omitted). In response, the non-movant "must make a sufficient showing on every element of his case on which he bears the burden of proof; if he fails to do so, there is no issue for trial." Yeatts v. Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc., 940 F.3d 354, 358 (7th Cir. 2019) (citing Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986)).

In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, a court must construe all facts and draw all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Id. (citation omitted). A court's role "is not to sift through the evidence, pondering the nuances and inconsistencies, and decide whom to believe. The court has one task and one task only: to decide, based on the evidence of record, whether there is any material dispute of fact that requires a trial." Waldridge v. Am. Hoechst Corp., 24 F.3d 918, 920 (7th Cir. 1994) (citations omitted). Facts that areoutcome determinative under the applicable law are material for summary judgment purposes. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986).

MATERIAL FACTS

A. K.B.'s Background

K.B., who was born in August 1993, has been in special education since Kindergarten. Ex. A 5:11 (K.B. Dep.), ECF No. 125; Ex. B 31:16-17, 33:15-17, 34:8-24 (Blade-Thompson Dep.), ECF No. 105-3.² Shortly after starting high school, K.B. began experiencing issues that prompted her parents to seek psychiatric and psychological treatment for her. Ex. A 54:24-57:25; Ex. B. 17:13-21. K.B. was diagnosed with bi-polar depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and panic attacks. Ex. A 63:23-64:7; Ex. B 26:1-6; Ex. C at VIERS 00001 (Doc. Prod. by Dr. L. Viers), ECF No. 126. Because many of these issues affected her in school, K.B. was placed on a homebound study program for her junior year. Ex. A 37:3-11, 37:23-25; Ex. D at No. 15. K.B. graduated from high school in 2012 with a basic diploma. Ex. A 36:9-10, 39:10-14, 94:12-20, 96:24-97:7; Ex. B 34:20-35:2.

B. Blade-Thompson's Guardianship of K.B.

When K.B. was nearing the age of majority and still in high school, it was suggested that Blade-Thompson seek a guardianship so that she could participate in medical and educational decisions, such as school meetings regarding K.B.'s individual education plan. Ex. B 29:11-30:5. Blade-Thompson also did not believe that K.B. had the ability to make her own decisions. Id. 31:3-11. On January 4, 2013, Blade-Thompson filed a Petition for Appointment of Guardian Over Incompetent Adult due to K.B.'s developmental disabilities and mental issues, including, but not limited to, depression, bipolar, and OCD. Pls.' Second Unnumbered Ex., ECF No. 117, pp. 12-14; Ex. R at ¶¶ 3, 4 (Order to Reopen Guardianship), ECF No. 135. K.B.'s psychiatrist Dr. Jayachandran provided a Physician's Report dated October 17, 2012, to the court for the guardianship petition, opining that K.B. "has been totally incapacitated for five (5) years." Pls.' Ex. A, ECF No. 117, pp. 9-11; see also Ex. B 36:17-37:13.

On February 12, 2013, the Lake Superior Court, Probate Division issued an Order Appointing Guardian Over the Person of Incapacitated Person, which ordered, adjudged, and decreed that "K.B. by reason of her incapacity is unable to care for her person and estate and is therefore adjudicated to be [an] incapacitated person and guardian over her person and estate are necessary." Pls.' First Unnumbered Ex., p. 2, ¶ 1, ECF No. 117, pp. 7-8. On January 13, 2017, the state court set the matter for a hearing for February 21, 2017. Ex. R at ¶ 8; Ex. S (Jan. 13, 2017 Order), ECF No. 136. Due to a change of address, Blade-Thompson did not receive the court's notice; as a result, she did not file the necessary paperwork or appear at the hearing, and the court closed the guardianship on June 17, 2017. Ex. R at ¶¶ 9, 10, 11. On May 21, 2018, Blade-Thompson learned from her attorney in this litigation that the guardianship had been terminated. Id. at ¶ 12. On June 18, 2018, the state court issued an Order to Reopen Guardianship and Appoint Guardian. Id. at ¶ 13.

C. K.B.'s Communications with Fies

In February 2011, K.B. enrolled in online dating sites with Blade-Thompson's approval. Ex. B 63:5-64:13; Ex. D at No. 8; Ex. E at STATE00031-32, ECF No. 127; Ex. F 31:1-8 (Tr. ofK.B. Police Interview), ECF No. 105-7. Before K.B. could meet face-to-face with someone she met online, she had to first introduce the person to her parents. Ex. B 64:14-65:23; Ex. G 29:11-21 (Blade Dep.), ECF No. 105-8. K.B. started communicating with a man (later determined to be Fies), who operated under the handle "s10renew," and the communications were sexually explicit. Ex. F 7:25-9:9; Ex. D Nos. 8, 11; Ex. E at STATE00031-32; Ex. H at No. 10 (Pl.'s RFA Resp.), ECF No. 105-9. Fies used his personal electronic devices to communicate with K.B., and the analysis of his high school and middle school computers did not contain anything relevant to this case. Ex. E STATE00018-27. At the end of August or early September 2011, K.B. stopped communicating with the man she later learned to be Fies because he refused to meet her parents. Ex. A 165:7-20; Ex. D at No. 11; Ex. E at STATE00031-32.

D. STOH's Awareness of Fies' Misconduct

On October 11, 2011, Highland High School cross country coach Elissa Belli received a phone call from the brother of a female student, who told her that Fies had inappropriate contact with his sister (who was not K.B.). Ex. E at STATE00035. At approximately 9:15 p.m. that night, Belli called Highland High School's School Resource Officer, Sergeant Michael O'Donnell, and Child...