Wigg v. Sioux Falls School Dist. 49-5
| Decision Date | 02 July 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. CIV. 03-4034.,CIV. 03-4034. |
| Citation | 274 F.Supp.2d 1084 |
| Parties | Barbara WIGG, Plaintiff, v. SIOUX FALLS SCHOOL DISTRICT 49-5; and Dr. Jack Keegan, in his individual and <I>official capacity as</I> Superintendent of the Sioux Falls School District, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of South Dakota |
Douglas E. Hoffman, Myers, Peters, Hoffman & Billion, Sioux Falls, SD, Mathew D. Stayer, Joel L. Oster, Rena M. Lindevaldsen, Liberty Counsel, Longwood, FL, for Plaintiff.
Michael L. Luce, Susan Brunick Simons, Sandra K. Hoglund, Dana Van Beek Palmer Davenport, Evans, Hurwitz & Smith, Sioux Falls, SD, for Defendant.
The Sioux Falls School District ("the District") and Dr. Jack Keegan, the Defendants in this action, have moved for summary judgment, Doc. 34, and have also moved to strike the jury trial demanded by the Plaintiff in this action, Doc. 32. Plaintiff Barbara Wigg has responded to both motions, and in her response regarding the motion to strike the jury trial demand, the Plaintiff filed an affidavit contradicting her deposition testimony and also filed an errata sheet making the substantive changes to her deposition. The Defendants subsequently made a motion to strike the Plaintiff's errata, Doc. 48. The Court held a motion hearing and pretrial conference in this matter on June 16, 2003, and heard argument on these pending motions. For the reasons stated below, the motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part; the motion to strike the jury trial demand is granted; and the motion to strike the Plaintiff's errata is granted. Additionally, the Plaintiff's Motion for a Permanent Injunction and for Declaratory Relief is granted in part and denied in part.
The Court has previously set out the essential facts of this case in its preliminary injunction opinion in this matter. See Wigg v. Sioux Falls School District, 259 F.Supp.2d 967 (D.S.D.2003). For the ease of the reader, some of those facts will be repeated here. Plaintiff Barbara Wigg is a second and third grade teacher at the Laura B. Anderson Elementary School in the Sioux Falls School District. She has been employed by the Sioux Falls School District ("District") since 1988 and has been assigned to five different elementary schools during her tenure with the District. According to the affidavit of Mary Peterson, principal at Anderson Elementary, the teachers at Anderson Elementary agreed to maintain regular scheduled hours from 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. each school day, although many teachers work more than this minimum schedule. See Peterson Aff. at ¶ 3, Doc. 17. Plaintiff testified in her deposition that she often stays at school until 4:00 p.m. or slightly later to complete her work. See Wigg Depo. at 77.
The District has chosen to permit access to its buildings to various organizations in order to foster community involvement. The groups range from school-sponsored to student-initiated as well as community organizations. The Good News Club is one such group. The Good News Club requested access to the school's facilities for its meetings in October 2002. The Good News Club was granted access to School District facilities, and currently meets at five elementary schools in the District, including Anderson Elementary. The group also meets at John Kennedy Elementary, Jefferson Elementary, Harvey Dunn Elementary, and Eugene Field Elementary. The group meets at Anderson Elementary Mondays from 3:00 to 4:00 p.m. after school has dismissed at 2:45 p.m. Although the record does not explicitly indicate the meeting times at the other schools, presumably the group meets at the conclusion of the school day like at Anderson Elementary.
The Good News Club is an after-school club sponsored by Child Evangelism Fellowship. According to its literature, the purpose of the club is to "evangelize boys and girls with the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and establish (disciple) them in the Word of God and in the local church for Christian living." See Keegan Aff., Ex 3, Doc. 16. In order to participate in the Good News Club, each child must present a signed permission slip from a parent.
The Plaintiff desires to participate in the Good News Club meetings that transpire at District facilities. The Good News Club first meet at Anderson Elementary on December 16, 2002 in the Anderson Elementary library. There were nine students present at this first meeting, four or five of whom were in the Plaintiff's combined second and third grade class. See Wigg Depo. at 31-32. Each of these students presented a signed parental permission slip to participate in the group. Id. at 33. At this first meeting, the students learned a Bible verse, heard a Christian story and played a game. Id. at 37-39. After her initial participation in the Good News Club, the Plaintiff was informed by Principal Mary Peterson that she could no longer take part in Good News Club meetings held on school property because of the District's concern that her participation in the group might be perceived as an establishment of religion. Since that time, Plaintiff has not participated in any Good News Club meetings within the District.
The District has a policy entitled Religion in the Schools and at School Activities ("religion policy"). The policy prohibits school personnel from participating in religious activities on school grounds or at school-sponsored activities unless the organization has leased the facility according to the lease provision in the community access policy. The record is clear that the District interprets the lease provision to only apply in situations in which a church leases space from the District to hold church services temporarily while the church secures other accommodations. Accordingly, application of the religion policy in this instance prohibits the Plaintiff from participating in the Good News Club because it is religious in nature and meets on school property.
On January 16, 2003, the Plaintiff sent a letter to the superintendent for the District Dr. John Keegan requesting that she be allowed to participate in the Good News Club. In her letter the Plaintiff informed the District that, in order to address the Establishment Clause concerns raised by the District, the Good News Club would require each student attending the group to provide a signed permission slip that would contain the following disclaimer:
The Good News Club is a private organization and is not affiliated with the Sioux Falls School District in any manner. If some of the participants in the Good News Club are also school district employees, then the school district employees are participating in the Good News Club on their own private time, and are not representing the school in any fashion. Nor are any school district employees "on-the-clock" while participating in the Good News Club.
See Verified Complaint for Declaratory Judgment, Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief and Damages, Ex. C, Doc. 1. The District responded to the Plaintiff's request on January 17, 2003, and stood by its earlier assessment that allowing the Plaintiff to participate in the Good News Club group at Anderson Elementary would present Establishment Clause issues for the District.
On January 28, 2003, the Plaintiff sent a second letter to the District again requesting that she be allowed to participate in Good News Club meetings. She relied upon the lease provision in the religion policy. In her letter, the Plaintiff claimed that she should be allowed to participate in Good News Club meetings if the club leased its facilities in accordance with the community use policy. The District sent a letter response on January 29, 2003, again denying the Plaintiff's request. In its letter the District explained that the provision of the policy referring to organizations which lease facilities was intended to cover circumstances in which the District permits a church to lease space in the event that the church is without its own facilities or in the process constructing its own facilities. The District claims that the language in the policy was included to allow District personnel to attend church services if her church were in such a situation of leasing facilities from the school. The District reiterated its position that if the Plaintiff participated in the Good News Club's meetings she would be violating school policy.
After repeated attempts to resolve this issue with the District failed, the Plaintiff instituted this action against the District seeking a preliminary injunction, a permanent injunction, declaratory relief, and damages. In its earlier opinion, the Court denied the Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction.
As stated above, the District has filed a motion to strike the jury trial demand made by the Plaintiff. This motion is based upon the District's assertion that the Plaintiff no longer has a viable claim for damages in this action and that her claims for equitable relief do not entitle her to a jury trial. The Court agrees.
In her response to the District's motion, the Plaintiff does not argue that she is entitled to a jury trial on her request for a permanent injunction or her request for a declaratory judgment. It is clear that there is no right to a trial by jury in purely equitable actions. See Smith v. World Ins. Co., 38 F.3d 1456, 1462 (8th Cir.1994)("the determination of ... equitable remedies is a matter for the court to decide, not the jury."). It is equally clear that "[a]ctions for injunctions are equitable in nature." 9 Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil 2d § 2308, p. 79 (1994). Therefore, the Plaintiff is not entitled to a jury trial on her claim for a permanent injunction.
With respect to declaratory judgment actions, the Court must evaluate the underlying nature of the claim to determine whether a right to a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Woods v. Rondout Valley Central School
...in Kansas, see Unified Sch. Dist. No. 480 v. Epperson, 583 F.2d 1118 (10th Cir.1978), in South Dakota, see Wigg v. Sioux Falls Sch. Dist. 49-5, 274 F.Supp.2d 1084 (D.S.D.2003), rev'd in part on other grounds, 382 F.3d 807 (8th Cir.2004), and in Delaware, see Eckerd v. Indian Sch. Dist., 475......
-
Soltesz v. Rushmore Plaza Civic Ctr.
...take a position in regard to the pending motion that is contradicted by their own prior sworn testimony. Wigg v. Sioux Falls School Dist. 49–5, 274 F.Supp.2d 1084, 1090 (D.S.D.2003), rev'd on other grounds,382 F.3d 807 (8th Cir.2004). In Wigg, the district court followed the law from the Te......
-
Ebc Inc v. Clark Bldg. Sys. Inc
...Ltd., 252 F.R.D. 295, 297 (D.Md.2008); Adams v. Allied Sec. Holdings, 236 F.R.D. 651, 652 (C.D.Cal.2006); Wigg v. Sioux Falls Sch. Dist. 49-5, 274 F.Supp.2d 1084, 1090-91 (D.S.D.2003); Summerhouse v. HCA Health Servs. of Kan., 216 F.R.D. 502, 504-08 Coleman v. S. Pac. Transp. Co., 997 F.Sup......
-
McClanahan v. Wilson
...does not have a right to a jury trial solely on the issue of nominal damages.") (citations omitted); Wigg v. Sioux Falls Sch. Dist. 49-5, 274 F. Supp. 2d 1084 (D.S.D. 2003) ("Plaintiff is not entitled to a jury trial in this matter because if she prevails, her nominal damages award will be ......
-
Discovery
...295, 297 (D. Md. 2008); Adams v. Allied Sec. Holdings , 236 F.R.D. 651, 652 (C.D. Cal. 2006); Wigg v. Sioux Falls Sch. Dist. 49-5 , 274 F. Supp. 2d 1084, 1090-91 (D.S.D. 2003), aff’d in part, rev’d in part , 382 F.3d 807 (8th Cir. 2004); Summerhouse v. HCA Health Servs. of Kansas , 216 F.R.......
-
Summary Judgment Practice and Procedure
...the changes, and thus did not satisfy the third factor of the Franks sham affidavit analysis); Wigg v. Sioux Falls Sch. Dist. 49-5 , 274 F.Supp.2d 1084, 1090 (D.S.D. 2003) (striking deposition changes asserting damages for the first time after defendant filed a motion to strike a jury deman......