Moore v. Solanco Sch. Dist.

• Citation: 471 F.Supp.3d 640
• Decision Date: 10 July 2020
• Docket Number: No. 5:19-cv-02621,5:19-cv-02621
• Parties: Eniyah Brown MOORE; Ebonie Bair, Individually and as Parent/Guardian of Minor Children A and B; and Rasul Nafis Moore, Plaintiffs, v. SOLANCO SCHOOL DISTRICT; Anthony Cox, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Solanco High School Football Coach; Lisa Yannutz; John Doe; and N. Y., a Minor, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

471 F.Supp.3d 640

Eniyah Brown MOORE; Ebonie Bair, Individually and as Parent/Guardian of Minor Children A and B; and Rasul Nafis Moore, Plaintiffs,

v.SOLANCO SCHOOL DISTRICT; Anthony Cox, Individually, and in His Official Capacity as Solanco High School Football Coach; Lisa Yannutz; John Doe; and N. Y., a Minor, Defendants.

No. 5:19-cv-02621

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.

Filed July 10, 2020

Brian R. Mildenberg, Mildenberg Law Firm PC, J. Conor Corcoran, Law Office of J. Conor Corcoran, Philadelphia, PA, for Plaintiffs.

John E. Freund, III, Brian J. Taylor, King, Spry, Herman, Freund & Faul, LLC, Bethlehem, PA, for Defendant Solanco School District.

Christopher J. Conrad, Lara K. Dellegrotti, Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, Camp Hill, PA, for Defendant Anthony Cox.

Kevin C. Allen, Crystle, Allen & Gimes, LLC, Lancaster, PA, for Defendants Lisa Yannutz, a Minor.

OPINION

Defendant Solanco School District's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 15 - Granted Defendant Cox's Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 16 - Granted in part and Denied in part Defendants Yannutz and N.Y.’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 36 - Granted

Joseph F. Leeson, Jr., United States District Judge

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Ebonie Bair initiated this action on behalf of, and/or along with, herself and her four children alleging that her two adult children (Plaintiffs Eniyah Brown Moore and Rasul Nafis Moore) were subjected to a racially hostile educational and/or athletic environment while attending Solanco High School. Named as Defendants are the Solanco School District; Anthony Cox, a football coach at Solanco High School; minor N.Y., a student at Solanco High School; and Lisa Yannutz and John Doe, the parents of N.Y. The named Defendants have each filed a Motion to Dismiss. For the reasons set forth below, this Court concludes Moore has stated a claim in Count III against Cox under § 1981 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Because Doe has not joined in the motions to dismiss, the claims against him under Counts V and VII also survive. All other parties and counts are dismissed, some with prejudice and some without prejudice, as discussed herein.

II. BACKGROUND

The Amended¹ Complaint alleges as follows: Plaintiff Ebonie Bair is the mother and parent/guardian of two minor children, Minor Plaintiffs A and B, who are aged five and eight years of age and attend an elementary school owned, operated, managed, directed and/or controlled by Defendant Solanco School District. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 6-7. Bair is also the mother of two adult children, Plaintiffs Rasul Nafis Moore ("Moore") and Eniyah Brown Moore ("Brown Moore")² who attended schools owned, operated, managed, directed, and/or controlled by Solanco. See id. at ¶¶ 6, 9. Moore graduated from Solanco High School in June 2019, and Brown Moore graduated from Solanco High School in June 2018. See id. at ¶ 18. Defendant Anthony Cox was a football coach at Solanco High School. See id. at ¶ 9. Cox coached Moore and fellow student Defendant N.Y. See id. at ¶¶ 22, 24.

The student body at Solanco High School is over 90% white. See Am. Compl. ¶ 20. Plaintiffs assert there was a pervasive, racially discriminatory, and hostile environment at Solanco High School for African American students, including Moore and Brown Moore, that was sanctioned by Solanco teachers and/or staff, including Cox. See id. at ¶¶ 21-22. The Amended Complaint alleges, inter alia , Cox called Moore "n***a" multiple times during football practice and throughout the football season and also "Buckwheat" in reference to the character from the Little Rascals. See id. at ¶ 23. Solanco also allowed students to utter and/or publish racial slurs, including but not limited to the word "n****r." See id.

On or about March 26, 2019, N.Y. posted a picture of Moore on N.Y.’s Instagram account of Moore in his Solanco football uniform, on Solanco's football field, but altered it to show Moore carrying a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken. See id. at ¶ 24. On the same Instagram account, N.Y. displayed an image of an African American man caught in a mouse trap with a bucket of Kentucky Fried Chicken used as the bait to lure him into the mouse trap. See id. at ¶ 25. Based on these actions, N.Y. was charged with a hate crime in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. See id. at ¶ 28. After the publication, Cox summoned Moore into his office and/or the weight room at Solanco High School and told Moore that he should not be offended by the Instagram posts. See id. at ¶ 29.

Plaintiffs allege that Cox's proclamation "served as the manifestation of a policy, practice, custom, proclamation, policy or edict." See id. at ¶ 93. They further contend that Cox's actions and/or inactions perpetuated a racially hostile athletic and educational environment at Solanco High School, by sending a message to the white students on the football team and/or at Solanco High that racist behavior would be given a pass. See id. at ¶ 31. Plaintiffs assert that Cox's actions and/or inactions "should not been a surprise" to Solanco because "Cox had displayed a history and pattern of racially discriminatory behavior, of which [ ] Solanco had explicit knowledge, including but not limited to his regular employment of the denigration of the word n***as to inter alia the African American high school students on his team...." Id. ¶ 33.

The Amended Complaint further alleges Solanco allowed students to wave Confederate flags during school football games and to display such flags on clothing during school hours and on their cars in the school parking lot. See Am. Compl. ¶¶ 23, 37. Brown Moore raised concerns with Solanco's Superintendent that she was extremely intimidated and offended by the brazen and repeated displays of the Confederate flag, but the Superintendent failed to take any corrective action against the displays of the Confederate flag, nor have any concerns about the environment said flag created in a public school. See id. at ¶ 39. Plaintiffs contend the Superintendent's failure to heed the complaints about the display of Confederate flags "served as the manifestation of a policy, practice, custom, proclamation, policy or edict." See id. at ¶ 94.

Solanco also failed to take any action to sanction or prevent students, who were in the presence and hearing of teachers, from calling Brown Moore names such as "watermelon," "n****r," and "jigaboo." See id. at ¶ 37. This conduct began on Brown Moore's first day as a transfer student in the fall of 2014 and continued through her senior year when, in the Spring of 2018, Brown Moore was in her political science class, which was discussing that year's valedictorian speech, when a white student suggested to the class how ridiculous it would be if Brown Moore spoke. See id. at ¶¶ 37, 40. The teacher's response was that Solanco doesn't allow those types of students to speak because they don't articulate like a valedictorian should. See id. Brown Moore asserts that this was an egregious, unlawful, racist denigration of her by a teacher at Solanco, and arguably one encouraged by the aforementioned hostile racist learning environment that has been allowed to fester at Solanco High School. See id.

The Moore Plaintiffs assert they were discriminated against because of their race and/or ethnicity and required to attend high school in a racist and hostile environment, which hampered their ability to receive an education and was detrimental to their intellectual, emotional, and psychological development. See id. at ¶¶ 41-42. Bair asserts that based on the actions and/or inactions of Defendants she is in eminently reasonable fear and apprehension that such a racially harassing and hostile fate awaits her minor children, minor Plaintiffs A and B, who must one day attend Solanco High as it is the only public high school near their residence. See id. at ¶ 43.

The Amended Complaint asserts the following counts: (I) brought by the Moore Plaintiffs against all Defendants for harassment and discrimination on the basis of ethnicity and race in violation of Title VI, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d ; (II) brought by the Moore Plaintiffs against all Defendants for race discrimination in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 ; (III) brought by the Moore Plaintiffs against all Defendants for numerous constitutional violations pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ; (IV) brought by the Moore Plaintiffs against all Defendants for Monell liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ; (V) brought by Moore against Cox, Yannutz, Doe, and N.Y. for conspiring to violate Moore's civil rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1985 ; (VI) brought by Bair against Solanco for a violation of 22 U.S.C. § 2201, et seq. ; and (VII) brought by Moore against Yannutz, Doe, and N.Y. for negligence under Pennsylvania law. See id. Plaintiffs seek compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorney's fees, and, as to Counts I through VI, the issuance of a consent decree and/or remedial program to remedy the allegedly historical pervasive environment of racial hostility in the Solanco School District. See id. Defendants Solanco, Cox, and Yannutz, on behalf of herself and N.Y., have each filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint. See ECF Nos. 15, 16, 36. Doe, who has not been served with the Amended Complaint, has not joined in the motions.

III. LEGAL STANDARDS

A. Motion to Dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6)

In rendering a decision on a motion to dismiss, this Court must "accept all factual allegations as true [and] construe the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff." Phillips v. Cnty. of Allegheny , 515 F.3d 224, 233 (3d Cir. 2008) (quoting Pinker v. Roche Holdings Ltd. , 292 F.3d 361, 374 n.7 (3d Cir. 2002) ) (internal quotation marks omitted). Only if "the ‘[f]actual allegations ... raise a right to relief above the speculative level’ " has the plaintiff stated a plausible claim. Id. at 234 (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) ). "A claim has...