K. L. v. Mo. State High Sch. Activities Ass'n
Decision Date | 08 April 2016 |
Docket Number | Case No: 4:15CV679 HEA |
Citation | 178 F.Supp.3d 792 |
Parties | K. L., by and through her next friend, Jim Ladlie, Plaintiff, v. Missouri State High School Activities Association, Board of Directors, Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri |
Amanda Davis Anthony, Kaitlyn Marie Rausch, Kiara Nayo Drake, Susan K. Eckles, Missouri Protection and Advocacy Services, Overland, MO, for Plaintiff.
Mallory V. Mayse, Mayse Law Office, Columbia, MO, for Defendant.
On the 26th day of February, 2016, evidentiary hearing was held before this Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, [Doc. No. 61]. Also pending before the Court are Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 52] and Plaintiff's Motion to Alter or Amend this Court's previous Order and Judgment Granting Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 46]. The Court now makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Plaintiff is a student at Troy-Buchanan High School (“TBHS”) in Troy, Missouri, within the Eastern District of Missouri. The named “Defendant” in the caption and opening paragraph of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint is the “Board of Directors” of the Missouri State High School Activities Association (hereinafter referred to as “MSHSAA” or “the Association”).1 According to her Amended Complaint, Plaintiff was born with a venous malformation involving her left leg, known as “Bockenheimer's Syndrome” and underwent surgical removal of her left leg above the knee in 2011. The evidence showed that the Plaintiff is an athlete who is active in extensive racing chair athletics, sled hockey and triathlon competition including use of her racing chair outside of her school with opportunities to compete and display her talent in regional and national competitions with para-athletes from other states. Plaintiff testified that she is returning for her fourth year as a member of the TBHS track team and uses a racing chair in 100m, 200m and 400m racing. Plaintiff described her racing chair as 4-5 feet long with three wheels. Plaintiff alleges that on average there is a “ten-second difference” in her 100m and 200m racing times but “no time difference” in her 400m race times compared to the performance of non-disabled runners. It was undisputed by Plaintiff that in head-to-head competition between non-disabled runners and para-athletes using racing chairs, the non-disabled runners have undisputed advantage in shorter distances while the advantage shifts in favor of para-athletes using racing chairs at longer distances, which makes head to head competition inequitable and unfair and no evidence was presented to this Court that there is any recognized method to make such head to head competition equitable and fair. Plaintiff does not request to race athletes without disabilities in head-to-head competition in her Amended Complaint. As stated in her Motion for Preliminary Injunction, “Plaintiff does not request accommodations requiring her to race directly against able-bodied racers...” While Plaintiff requests an Order of this Court to receive team points when she competes, she testified that she also “would rather race against disabled athletes and get a chance to win” or “by myself.”2
The hearing testimony and Affidavit of Harvey Richards demonstrate significant efforts by Defendants to develop future Track and Field opportunities for Missouri high school students with Adaptive Events for para-athletes:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
A.H. v. Ill. High Sch. Ass'n
...district court found that the board of the MSHSAA was not a proper "public entity" because it is not a legal "entity" at all. 178 F.Supp.3d 792, 808 (E.D. Mo. 2016). A.H. has sued the organization, not the Board, and there is no argument that IHSA is not a suable entity.IHSA points the Cour......
-
Smith v. Holder
...include individuals. Alsbrook v. City of Maumelle, 184 F.3d 999, 1005 n.8 (8th Cir. 1999); see also K.L. v. Mo. State. High Sch. Activities Ass'n, 178 F. Supp. 3d 792, 808 (E.D. Mo. 2016) (finding that individuals cannot be construed as a public entity under the ADA definition). Thus, the C......