McNeally v. HomeTown Bank
| Decision Date | 21 June 2022 |
| Docket Number | 21-cv-2614 (ECT/DTS) |
| Parties | Tara C. McNeally, Plaintiff, v. HomeTown Bank; Lindsey Puffer, Branch Manager and Vice President, in her individual capacity; Shakopee Public Schools, Independent School District No. 720; Shakopee Public Schools Board; Michael Redmond, Superintendent, in his individual capacity; and Kristi Peterson, Board Chair, in her individual capacity, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota |
Steven M. Cerny, Santi Cerny, PLLC, Minneapolis, MN, for Plaintiff Tara C. McNeally.
Zachary A. Alter and Sara Gullickson McGrane, Felhaber Larson, Minneapolis, MN, for Defendant Michael Redmond.
Brittany R. King-Asamoa and Jennifer G. Lurken, Gislason & Hunter LLP, Mankato, MN, for Defendants HomeTown Bank and Lindsey Puffer.
Christian R. Shafer and Adam Frudden, Ratwik, Roszak & Maloney, PA, Saint Paul, MN, for Defendants Shakopee Public Schools, Shakopee Public Schools Board, and Kristi Peterson.
On September 27, 2021, Plaintiff Tara McNeally attended a public meeting of the Shakopee Public Schools Board and expressed her views regarding a student-masking requirement and a proposed operating levy. After the meeting, she expressed her views concerning the in-meeting behavior of the Board's Chair. Two days later, the Superintendent for Shakopee Public Schools, Michael Redmond, barred McNeally from being present in any part of the school district except “in the role of a parent,” and her employer, HomeTown Bank, suspended her employment pending the outcome of a School District investigation. HomeTown fired McNeally on October 12. In this case, McNeally alleges that Defendants retaliated against her exercise of First Amendment free-speech rights and that Redmond tortiously interfered with her employment relationship with HomeTown.
Redmond and HomeTown seek dismissal of McNeally's Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), and their motions will be denied. McNeally alleges facts plausibly showing that Redmond and HomeTown worked together to retaliate against McNeally for her exercise of First Amendment rights and that Redmond interfered unlawfully with McNeally's HomeTown employment.
McNeally resides in Shakopee, Minnesota, and is the mother of two children enrolled in the Shakopee Public Schools. Compl. ¶ 3 [ECF No. 1].
Defendant Shakopee Public Schools, Independent School District No. 720 (the “District”) is a public school district and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota. Id. ¶ 6. Defendant Shakopee Public Schools Board (the “Board”) governs the District. Id. ¶ 7. The Board is responsible for “developing and implementing policies and procedures of the Board and the District, and for hiring, overseeing, and directing the activities” of the District's Superintendent, Michael Redmond. Id. ¶¶ 7-8. As Superintendent, Redmond “is responsible for the management and operations of the District, speaking and acting on behalf of the District, developing and administrating policies and procedures on behalf of the District, and carrying out the directives of the [] Board, the Board Chair, and its members.” Id. ¶ 8. Defendant Kristi Peterson chairs the Board. As Chair, Peterson “is responsible for the overall functioning of the Board and governing of the District, speaking and acting on behalf of the Board and the District, overseeing the work of the Board, presiding over Board meetings, determining who may speak at Board meetings and for how long, developing and approving the agenda for Board meetings, developing and implementing policies and procedures on behalf of the Board and the District, and overseeing and directing the activities of . . . Redmond.” Id. ¶ 9.
HomeTown operates several bank branches in Minnesota, including one branch in the City of Shakopee and another inside Shakopee High School. Id. ¶ 4. Through its relationship with the District, Hometown “periodically provid[es] bank employees to discuss financial literacy with students, provid[es] internship opportunities to students, and provid[es] other services.” Id. Defendant Lindsey Puffer is the Branch Manager and Vice President of HomeTown's Shakopee locations. Id. ¶ 5. “Puffer is responsible for the management and operations of her branch locations, developing and administering policies and procedures on behalf of her branch locations, speaking and acting on behalf of her branch locations, and carrying out the directives of the HomeTown Bank Board of Directors and Leadership Team.” Id.
In 2020, HomeTown hired McNeally to work as a personal banker at both of its Shakopee locations. Id. ¶ 11. McNeally's duties “included working as a teller, opening and closing accounts, customer service, hiring, training, managing interns from Shakopee High School, [] networking,” and marketing. Id. ¶ 12. “On several occasions, McNeally also taught financial literacy to students at Shakopee Public Schools, attending various classes at different campuses as a guest speaker.” Id.
McNeally's twelve-year-old daughter is enrolled in the Shakopee Public Schools and has a medical condition “that is exacerbated by wearing a mask, and wearing a mask has on repeated occasions resulted in her experiencing adverse health reactions” like “shortness of breath, lightheadedness, tunnel vision, and fainting.” Id. ¶ 14.
On August 23, 2021, the Board held a public meeting during which it discussed “pandemic response rules and procedures developed, in part, by [a] Pandemic Response Advisory Team, a committee established by the Board and whose members include Redmond and Peterson.” Id. ¶ 15. Redmond presented a resolution that “outlined recommendations and requirements for students to wear masks in school.” Id. The Board passed the resolution unanimously and authorized Redmond to “implement and enforce” it. Id.
Owing to the Board's action, when the 2021-2022 school year began, the District required McNeally's daughter to wear a mask during school. Id. ¶ 17. Although McNeally informed the District of her daughter's medical condition, it “was not receptive to her [] medical needs.” Id. For several weeks, McNeally's daughter was “singled out and repeatedly harassed and berated in front of other students on a near daily basis by a teacher . . . regarding the type of mask she wore over her nose and mouth.” Id. ¶ 18. McNeally reached out to school officials, and eventually Redmond, to stop the teacher's “harassing” behavior. Id. By “late August and early September 2021, the School Defendants knew that McNeally opposed their position on forcing students to wear masks in school.” Id. ¶ 20.
McNeally began engaging with other community members about the District's mask policy. She encouraged them to “share information” about the effect of maskwearing on children in school and to “raise awareness” about the Board's actions. Id. ¶ 25. McNeally co-created a Facebook group called “Parents Against Forced Masking” to generate discourse about mask-wearing, to encourage opposition to mask-wearing in schools, and to inform parents that the Board would address mask-wearing at future meetings. Id. ¶ 26. McNeally encouraged parents to attend the next meeting and to “share their views and positions as to why the Board should not force students to wear masks.” Id. ¶ 28. By this time, Redmond, the Board, and Board Chair Peterson knew that McNeally had formed the Facebook group, that she opposed a “blanket mask mandate,” and that she was raising awareness before the Board's next meeting. Id. ¶ 27.
A “large group” of parents attended the Board's September 13, 2021 meeting to voice their opposition to forced mask-wearing. Id. ¶ 29. Once again, Redmond presented to the Board about “recommendations and requirements for students to wear masks in school.” Id. ¶ 30. The mask mandate wasn't the only significant issue on the Board's September 13 agenda. Redmond also presented in favor of a proposed operating levy that would be voted on by residents in a November 2021 election and spoke about “the consequences and budget cuts that would be made if the levy did not pass.” Id. ¶ 30; see also id. ¶ 23. Redmond, Peterson, and other Board members favored the levy's passage. Id. ¶ 23. During the meeting, McNeally and other parents used the levy to pressure the Board on mask-wearing. Their position, in other words, was that “if the Board was not going to give proper weight and consideration to their views and opinions, then [they] would not vote in favor of the operating levy.” Id. ¶ 31. McNeally held a sign that read “MASKS = NO LEVY.” Id.
On September 23, Redmond visited HomeTown's location in the city of Shakopee to speak with an employee. McNeally was working there at the time. She asked Redmond “how a parent could get on the list” to speak at the Board's next meeting. Id. ¶ 34. Redmond instructed her to email the District offices but added, “You know, you do not want to get mixed up with that other group, you do not want to be associating with them, you have done so much in the community and worked your way up, it would be a shame if that all goes away.” Id. McNeally understood “that other group” to mean parents who opposed the operating levy. Id. ¶ 35.
McNeally attended the Board's next meeting on September 27. One parent spoke to the Board about her opposition to mask-wearing and its effect on her child's medical condition. Id. ¶ 36. While the parent spoke, McNeally saw Peterson “repeatedly turn her head to look at the screen behind her”; when others spoke, Peterson turned only “once” or “not . . . at all.” Id. “It also appeared to McNeally that, unlike other speakers, Peterson repeatedly looked at Redmond and other Board members” and seemed “disinterested” in the presentation. Id.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial