Lincoln Mem'l Acad. v. Florida

• Decision Date: 30 December 2022
• Docket Number: 8:20-cv-309-CEH-AAS
• Parties: LINCOLN MEMORIAL ACADEMY; EDDIE HUNDLEY; MELVIA SCOTT; JAUANA PHILLIPS; KATRINA ROSS; and ANGELLA ENRISMA Plaintiffs, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; SCHOOL DISTRICT OF MANATEE COUNTY, FLORIDA[1]; and THE CITY OF PALMETTO, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida

LINCOLN MEMORIAL ACADEMY; EDDIE HUNDLEY; MELVIA SCOTT; JAUANA PHILLIPS; KATRINA ROSS; and ANGELLA ENRISMA Plaintiffs,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; SCHOOL DISTRICT OF MANATEE COUNTY, FLORIDA^[1]; and THE CITY OF PALMETTO, Defendants.

No. 8:20-cv-309-CEH-AAS

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division

December 30, 2022

ORDER

Charlene Edwards Honeywell United States District Judge

This cause comes before the Court upon Defendant State of Florida, Department of Education's Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint with Prejudice (Doc. 112), Defendant Manatee County School Board's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint with Prejudice (Doc. 118), and the City of Palmetto's Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint with Prejudice (Doc. 119). Plaintiffs Lincoln Memorial Academy, Eddie Hundley, Melvia Scott, Jauana

1

Phillips, Katrina Ross, and Angella Enrisma respond in opposition (Doc. 113, 150152). The School Board has also replied (Doc. 202) and Lincoln Memorial has sur-replied (Doc. 295) on a limited issue, to which the School Board responds (Doc. 301).

These filings also pend: Plaintiffs' Motion for Judicial Notice of Certain Adjudicative Facts Contained in the Court Record (Doc. 296) and the City of Palmetto's response in opposition (Doc. 302); Plaintiffs Lincoln Memorial Academy and Eddie Hundley's Motion to Substitute/Motion to Join Commissioner of Education Richard Corcoran as a Party Defendant Pursuant to Rules 15 and 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Doc. 288) and the Department of Education's response in opposition (Doc. 292); the Motion for Reconsideration: Objection to Order of Dismissal and Motion to Vacate (Doc. 282) and the Department of Education's response in opposition (Doc. 284); and Lincoln Memorial Academy's Motion for Order Granting Partial Summary Judgment in Favor of Plaintiff Lincoln Memorial Academy (Doc. 283) and the School Board's response in opposition (Doc. 289).

I. BACKGROUND

A. Introduction

Ordinarily, the Court would begin with a recitation of relevant facts. But this action's painfully confusing development demands a different approach. Plaintiffs Lincoln Memorial Academy (“LMA”), Eddie Hundley, Dr. Melvia Scott, Jauna Phillips, Katrina Ross, and Angella Enrisma (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this action. Some of them initiated the action on February 11, 2020 (Doc. 1). The First Amended Complaint followed shortly thereafter (Doc. 6). With exhibits, that pleading

2

was 96 pages long. The Court dismissed it, without prejudice, as a shotgun pleading. Now, the operative pleading is the 69-page Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 108). With exhibits, it swells to 237 pages. It, too, is a shotgun pleading.

The School Board of Manatee County (“SBMC”), the City of Palmetto (the “City”) and the State of Florida, Department of Education (the “Department” and, together with the SBMC and the City, “Defendants”) have moved to dismiss (Docs. 112, 118, 119). An earlier order stayed all case-management deadlines until the Court issued a ruling on the motions to dismiss. Doc. 243 at 5; see also Doc. 250 at 2. Notwithstanding that order staying the case-management deadlines, LMA filed three motions for summary judgment (Docs. 244, 245, 246). For nearly three hours, the Court held oral argument on the motions to dismiss (Doc. 278). At the hearing, the Court announced that it would grant the Department's motion, but advised the parties to rely on a subsequent written order. The Court also advised that it would take under advisement SBMC's motion and the City's motion. Numerous motions followed oral argument See, e.g., Docs. 282, 283, 288, 296.

The parties have patiently awaited rulings on the motions to dismiss. To be sure, the Court has not ruled on those motions as quickly as anticipated. This delay has resulted from several factors, including but not limited to, the inartful pleading of the Second Amended Complaint, an avalanche of filings on the docket, and the backlog of criminal jury trials over which the undersigned has presided, caused by the suspension of jury trials due to Covid-19. But the parties need not wait any longer; today, those rulings arrive. For the reasons set forth below, the Court will dismiss the

3

Second Amended Complaint as a shotgun pleading, grant the Department's motion to dismiss, grant the City's motion to dismiss, and grant-in-part and deny-in-part SBMC's motion to dismiss. The Court will dismiss the Second Amended Complaint, with prejudice.

B. Factual Background^[2]

i. Revocation of Hundley's Certificate

From 2014 to 2018, Eddie Hundley served as the principal of Lincoln Middle School in Palmetto, Manatee County, Florida. Doc. 108 ¶91.^[3] In 2016, after a parent informed Hundley that her foster daughter's diary indicated that her daughter had entered into a relationship with Quintin Peterson, a teacher who worked at Lincoln Middle School, Hundley removed Peterson from the classroom, notified the Manatee County School District,^[4] and initiated a misconduct investigation. Id. at ¶¶91, 94. After the investigation was closed as “unfounded,” Peterson returned to work. Id. at ¶94. A later complaint about Peterson's conduct with a female student resulted in an investigation, Hundley again removed Peterson from the classroom, and the investigation concluded as “unfounded.” Doc. 108 ¶95, Doc. 108 at 103-104. School

4

Superintendent Diana Green ordered Hundley to issue a letter of reprimand to Peterson. Doc. 108 ¶95; Doc. 108 at 104. When a third allegation about Peterson conducting an inappropriate affair with a female student occurred, Peterson was again removed from the classroom. Id. at ¶96. Authorities conducted an investigation and closed the case. Id. at ¶96. When the investigation was closed, Hundley and Assistant Principal Darlene Proue, a Caucasian female, inquired when Peterson could return to work. Id. at ¶96. The Palmetto Police Chief “misled” Hundley and Proue “into thinking that the investigation ha[d] been completed.” Id. at ¶97. They reasoned that Peterson could return to work because the investigation had concluded. Id.

The Sarasota County School District contacted Hundley and Proue for a professional reference for Peterson after he applied for employment with the District. Id. at ¶98. Proue responded to the District's questionnaire about Peterson's character and qualifications during a telephone call. Id. at ¶99. On the other hand, Hundley answered an email reference request. Id. Hundley and Proue provided positive references for Peterson. Id. at ¶100. Like Proue, Hundley did not inform the District about Peterson's earlier misconduct investigations. Id. at ¶101. Hundley and Proue determined that Peterson was “innocent until proven guilty” and “had been cleared or exonerated,” even though he had been the subject of earlier investigations. Id. In completing a digital reference form, Hundley placed Peterson in “the top 5%.” Id. at ¶102. Peterson worked for the District following his “permanent[]” hiring in February

5

of 2018 until his date of arrest for alleged possession of child pornography in April of 2018. Id. at ¶103.

In 2018, the Manatee County School District reported Hundley to the Florida Department of Education for having committed an ethics violation by providing a positive reference for Peterson. Id. at ¶104. No action was taken against Proue. Id. On March 8, 2019, an administrative law judge recommended, in relevant part, that Hundley's educator's certificate be revoked for five years. Id. at ¶105; Doc. 108 at 127. On May 13, 2019, having adopted the administrative law judge's findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Education Practices Commission revoked Hundley's educator's certificate for five years. Doc. 108 ¶105; Doc. 108 at 95.

ii. LMA's Launch and Shut-Off Notice

Hundley founded LMA, a conversion charter school. Doc. 108 ¶3-4. Hundley served as both chief executive officer and principal of the school. Id. at ¶4. LMA received authorization to take over the operations of the administration of Lincoln Middle School. Id. at ¶20(A). LMA launched during the 2018-2019 school year. Id. at ¶20(B).

From September of 2018 through June 18, 2019, LMA encountered “slow-pay issues” as to payment of its monthly water bills to the City. Id. at ¶24. A June 13, 2019 utility bill from the City provided a “past due” amount of $12,439.23, listed “current charges” in the amount of $3,216.67, and indicated that the due date was July 5, 2019. Id. at ¶25; Doc. 108 at 73. LMA and the City had allegedly entered into a “repayment agreement” to alleviate LMA's payment difficulties. Id. In support of this allegation,

6

LMA cites to a June 13, 2019 email, attached to the Second Amended Complaint, in which a representative of the City's utility billing customer service supervisor wrote to an LMA representative that an account was “currently past due” and to inquire when the City “could expect the payment check per . . . our payment arrangement.” Doc. 108 at 75; see Doc. 108 ¶25. On the same day, the LMA representative responded: “We will be back on track with the twice per month payments in July. 15th and 30th.” Doc. 108 at 75. Plaintiffs allege that, in accordance with this e-mail, LMA issued a payment to the City on June 15, 2019. Doc. 108 ¶25.

On June 18, 2019, despite the alleged repayment agreement, Palmetto Mayor Shirley Bryant emailed Cynthia Saunders to advise that based on the City's “standard collection policies of [its] utility accounts,” the City needed to take action. Id. at ¶26; Doc. 108 at 71. Bryant advised that a notice including “a termination of service date” would likely be mailed to LMA by the close of business that day. Id. On the same day, LMA disbursed payment for $12,439.23. Id. at ¶26; see Doc. 108 at 82. Also on the same day, Bryant sent an email to Saunders, stating that LMA had “brought [its] account up to...