L.W. v. Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis, Inc.

• Decision Date: 21 June 2022
• Docket Number: 1:21-cv-02397-JMS-MJD
• Parties: L.W. and J.P., Individually and as Co-Guardians of John Doe,, v. ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE OF INDIANAPOLIS, INC. and RONCALLI HIGH SCHOOL, INC., .
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Indiana

L.W. and J.P., Individually and as Co-Guardians of John Doe,,
v.
ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHDIOCESE OF INDIANAPOLIS, INC. and RONCALLI HIGH SCHOOL, INC., .

No. 1:21-cv-02397-JMS-MJD

United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division

June 21, 2022

ORDER

HON. JANE MAGNUS-STINSON, JUDGE

Plaintiffs L.W. and J.P. are co-guardians of John Doe, an eighteen-year-old incapacitated adult with physical and mental impairments. John Doe attended school at Defendant Roncalli High School, Inc. ("Roncalli"), a religious school operated by Defendant Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis, Inc. ("the Archdiocese"). In the fall of 2019, while John Doe was a student at Roncalli and an equipment manager for the football team, two incidents occurred where John Doe alleges varsity football players bullied and sexually harassed him. L.W. and J.P. bring this action individually and as co-guardians of John Doe, alleging claims against Roncalli and the Archdiocese related to their response to the harassment and bullying John Doe alleges he experienced. Specifically, they allege that Defendants violated the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, etseq. ("the Rehabilitation Act") and Title IX, 20 U.S.C. § 1681, etseq. ("Title IX"). [Filing No. 48.] Plaintiffs also allege negligence claims against Defendants. [Filing No. 48.] Roncalli and the Archdiocese have filed a Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), seeking dismissal of all of Plaintiffs' claims. [Filing No. 50.] That motion is now ripe for the Court's review.

1

I.

Standard of Review

Under Rule 12(b)(6), a party may move to dismiss a claim that does not state a right to relief. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that a complaint provide the defendant with "fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests." Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (quoting Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint, the Court must accept all well-pled facts as true and draw all permissible inferences in favor of the plaintiff. Alarm Detection Sys., Inc. v. Vill. of Schaumburg, 930 F.3d 812, 821 (7th Cir. 2019). A Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss asks whether the complaint "contain[s] sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). "A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged." Id. (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556). "Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). Factual allegations must plausibly state an entitlement to relief "to a degree that rises above the speculative level." Munson v. Gaetz, 673 F.3d 630, 633 (7th Cir. 2012). This plausibility determination is "a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense." Id.

II.

Background

The following are the factual allegations contained in the Second Amended Complaint, [Filing No. 48], the operative complaint in this case, which the Court must accept as true at this time. The Court also sets forth and considers Plaintiffs' allegations contained in their response to

2

Defendants' Notice of Supplemental Authorities Supporting Defendants' Third Motion to Dismiss. [Filing No. 69.] The Court may consider these allegations, which Plaintiffs discovered after filing the Second Amended Complaint, as long as they are consistent with the allegations in the Second Amended Complaint - and the Court finds that they are. See Geinosky v. City of Chicago, 675 F.3d 743, 745 n.1 (7th Cir. 2012) ("A plaintiff...has much more flexibility in opposing a Rule 12(b)(6) motion [and] may elaborate on his factual allegations so long as the new elaborations are consistent with the pleadings."); Help at Home Inc. v. Medical Capital, L.L.C., 260 F.3d 748, 752 (7th Cir. 2001) ("A plaintiff need not put all of the essential facts in the complaint; he may add them by affidavit or brief in order to defeat a motion to dismiss if the facts are consistent with the allegations of the complaint.") (quotation and citation omitted).

A. Roncalli's Policies and Procedures

For the 2019-2020 school year, one of Roncalli's stated purposes as set forth in the Roncalli Student Handbook was for graduates to honor and glorify God through "DIGNITY - recognizing that every person is created in the image and likeness of God, having the utmost respect for life, and embracing a diverse world." [Filing No. 48 at 3.] Roncalli offered a "STARS-Special Education Services Program" ("STARS") for students with intellectual or learning disabilities. [Filing No. 48 at 3.] The program was designed so "[a]ll students can succeed when provided with the right atmosphere to meet their needs. It is our job as teachers and parents to provide an atmosphere that will assist students to reach their potential and realize their God given talents." [Filing No. 48 at 3-4.]

The goals for STARS included:

• Identify and meet the needs of individual students

• Assist teachers to develop and monitor specific behavioral intervention plans

3

• Educate staff, faculty, and [the] student body on learning differences;

• Provide in-service opportunities for teachers regarding best practices, differentiation strategies and disability awareness;

• Provide STARS students with necessary skills to live an independent and productive life after high school; and

• Include STARS.. .students in extracurricular activities/campus life.

[Filing No. 48 at 4.]

Roncalli had numerous policies in place related to student behavior, including the following most relevant policies:

11.3 Child Abuse Reporting

In accordance with the Safe and Sacred policies of the [A]rchdiocese of Indianapolis and Indiana law, any report or suspicion of child abuse and/or neglect will be reported to the appropriate authorities for their investigation.

13.0 Code of Conduct

Everyone at Roncalli is expected to show respect for themselves and those around them, as well as the material and physical surroundings which are provided. Each member of this school community has the right to grow and mature intellectually, physically, emotionally and spiritually. At the same time, each person has the responsibility to see that others' rights are respected and upheld. Language and behavior should contribute in a positive way to school life. Rules and regulations represent guidelines for behavior. It is impossible to write rules to cover all situations that may arise but the rules in existence are designed to enable all those at Roncalli to function harmoniously with each other. If everyone abides by the rules, we contribute to an environment in which persons can find experiences that will help them grow in meaningful ways. By breaking rules, a student infringes on another's rights, disrupts the community and often hurts him/herself in the process. If this happens, the offender must accept the consequences for what he/she did. At Roncalli, the consequences will take various forms, according to the degree of violation of the rules and of people's rights. Everyone makes mistakes. No one is perfect. The goal is that everyone learn[s] from mistakes and thus becomes an individual who makes an even better contribution to the total school community.

13.1 Expectations

Each student of a Catholic high school is to exemplify the highest behavior, that of being a Christian with all its implications. One of the essential purposes of a

4

Roncalli education is the formation of character. The rules of the school, designed for the purpose and in the interest of good order, are exercised with discretion and justice. Roncalli does not hold itself responsible for student offenses committed outside its jurisdiction; yet any conduct that is detrimental to the reputation of the school or that binds the advancement and moral good of the students in general is sufficient cause for suspension or expulsion. Roncalli High School prides itself on being a welcoming, Christian community. As such the behavior of our students should model this welcoming spirit at all times. Language and/or behavior that is racist, sexist, homophobic or ethnically degrading is not acceptable and would be grounds for disciplinary action.

14.11 Harassment/Bullying

Roncalli stands against harassment/bullying of any sort. For obvious reasons, both biblical and Catholic, harassment/bullying violates our mandate not only to love one another, but in all circumstances to accept one another despite our differences.

When these violations are expressed openly in language or behavior, they are reprehensible. Roncalli will not allow behavior that mocks, diminishes or impugns the dignity or integrity of any person or group. No racist, sexist or homophobic expression, language or behavior will be tolerated.

Harassment/bullying includes but is not limited to the following:

1. Verbal Harassment/bullying

2. Physical Harassment/bullying

3. Visual Harassment/bullying

4. Sexual Harassment/bullying

Any incident of harassment/bullying/intimidation should be communicated to an administrator, counselor or social worker at Roncalli. All reports about harassment/bullying/intimidation will be taken seriously and investigated thoroughly. Any student found in violation of this policy will face serious disciplinary consequences up to and including expulsion. Any student filing false or frivolous charges or making frivolous accusations will face similar consequences.

...