Williams ex rel. Allen v. Cambridge Bd., No. 02-3200.
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Sutton |
| Citation | 370 F.3d 630 |
| Parties | Rhys WILLIAMS, a minor, by his mother and next friend, Gail ALLEN, et al.; Gail Allen; David Allen, Plaintiffs-Appellants (02-3200), Zachary Durbin, a minor; Bobbi LaCross, Plaintiffs-Appellants (02-3207), v. CAMBRIDGE BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., Defendants-Appellees. |
| Docket Number | No. 02-3207.,No. 02-3200. |
| Decision Date | 04 June 2004 |
Page 630
Zachary Durbin, a minor; Bobbi LaCross, Plaintiffs-Appellants (02-3207),
v.
CAMBRIDGE BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Page 631
James D. McNamara (argued and briefed), Columbus, OH, for Plaintiff-Appellant in 02-3200.
Mark E. Jurkovac (argued and briefed), Rick J. Abraham (briefed), Columbus, OH, for Plaintiff-Appellant in 02-3207.
Brian M. Zets (argued and briefed), Schottenstein, Zox & Dunn, Mark D. Landes (argued and briefed), Jeffrey A. Stankunas, Isaac, Brant, Ledman & Teetor, John S. Higgins (briefed), Richard W. Ross (argued and briefed), Means Bichimer, Burkholder & Baker Co., Columbus, OH, for Defendants-Appellees in 02-3200 and 02-3207.
Before: DAUGHTREY, MOORE, and SUTTON, Circuit Judges.
SUTTON, Circuit Judge.
On April 20, 1999, fourteen students and one teacher were killed at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado. Two students at the school, we eventually learned, were responsible for the killing spree.
On Friday, April 23, 1999, three days after Columbine, a trio of students at Cambridge Junior High School in Cambridge, Ohio reported to the Vice-Principal of the school that Rhys Williams and Zach Durbin planned to commit acts of violence at the school. Rhys and Zach had prior criminal records and both were then on juvenile probation. After interviewing the three students, after taking written statements from each of them, after interviewing Zach Durbin (the only one of the two boys at school that day) and after consulting with probation officers, school officials initiated "emergency remov[al]" proceedings
Page 632
against the two students. As a result, juvenile parole officers took both students into custody at a juvenile detention facility for the weekend. On the following Monday morning, the juvenile court placed both students on house arrest for several days, and they did not return to school for ten days in Zach's case and for several days in Rhys's case. According to school officials, the boys stayed home through voluntary decisions of their parents. According to the boys' parents, the school suspended them for these periods of time. The juvenile prosecutor ultimately did not file charges against Rhys Williams, but he did file an aggravated menacing charge against Zach Durbin. In September 1999, Zach was acquitted of the charge.
In the aftermath of the arrests, the boys and their parents filed constitutional tort claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (along with several state-law claims) against the relevant school officials and law enforcement officers. In particular, they contended (1) that the local officials failed to establish probable cause for the arrests in violation of the Fourth Amendment and (2) that the two boys received school suspensions without due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court rejected these claims and several others as a matter of law. We affirm.
A. Events Preceding the April 23rd Arrest
In April 1999, Rhys Williams and Zach Durbin were fourteen years old and were in the eighth grade at Cambridge Junior High School. Both students had previous criminal problems and were on juvenile probation in April 1999. Rhys also had been disciplined by the school for several incidents of threatening behavior.
On Wednesday, April 21, 1999, one day after the Columbine tragedy, the two boys went to Rhys's house. While there, they watched television coverage of the Columbine shootings with Rhys's mother, Gail Allen. At some point that afternoon, Rhys asked his mother what she would do if Rhys and Zach did "something like that." JA at 469 (Durbin Dep.).
Later that night Zach spoke with a classmate, Kayla Hollins, on the telephone. According to Zach, he merely told Kayla about his conversation with Rhys and Gail Allen earlier in the day. According to Kayla, Zach told her that he was "getting sick of the way things were going" and was planning on bringing a gun to school or bombing the school. JA at 252 (Hollins Test.). Kayla alleged that Zach also said he would kill the "preps" first, JA at 147 (Hollins Recorded Statement) — meaning that he would kill Sadie LePage and that Kayla would be "one of the first to go," JA at 532 (Hollins Dep. I) — but that he would not hurt Katie Spittle because he liked her, JA at 151 (Hollins Written Statement).
B. Friday, April 23, 1999
1. Zach Durbin
On Friday morning of that week, two days after her conversation with Zach, Kayla wrote a note to Sadie LePage, saying that Zach "was going to bring a gun to school and shoot us all because he was sick of bitchy preps." JA at 152 (LePage Written Statement). Sadie showed the note to Katie Spittle, another classmate. During the lunch period, Sadie and Katie asked Zach whether the contents of the note were true, and he allegedly told them they were, a point that Zach disputes. After lunch, Sadie and Katie told school officials about the threat. They first told Julie Orsini, the guidance counselor, about the note that Kayla had written. Orsini notified Vice Principal William Howell about
Page 633
the matter and relayed her impression that the girls were "visibly shaken up [and]... feeling threatened." JA at 576 (Howell Dep.). Howell met with Sadie and Katie individually, and later called Kayla to his office as well. All three girls spoke to Howell about what had happened, then wrote statements in which they described the events of that morning and their interactions with Zach. In Kayla's statement, she said the following:
I talked to Zac on the phone Wednesday night & he said he was sick of everybody, everyone was getting on his nerves & he & Rhys Williams were talking about bringing a gun to school & he was very serious about the matter[.][H]is other option was planting a bomb & taking everyone out on the first (one) shot. But he had made very clear he would spare Katie Spittle because he liked her. This morning I [said]to Sadie LePage I had spoken to Zac & she asked what about & that is when I wrote Sadie telling her about our (mine & Zac's) conversation. Half of the note is now gone.
Id.
Sadie said the following in her statement:
I was sitting in first period today and Kayla Hollins wrote me a note that said Zac Durbin was going to bring a gun to school and shoot us all because he was sick of bitchy preps and he was going to start with me because he hated me so much. Then it said that he said it would just be easier to plant a bomb because he could get us all at once. Then in band (second period) I showed Katie Spittle the note because I was scared and she took the note to him at lunch and he said that it was really true, that he was talking to Rhys and they were seriously thinking about it. Zac hates me so much because I broke up with him 1-2 months ago. And he said he was going to spare Katie of all of this because he likes her.
JA at 152.
And Katie said the following in her statement:
This morning in 2nd period (Band) Sadie LePage showed me the note. At lunch I asked Zac if it was really true, and he said yes. He said him and Rhys were talking about it. He pointed to Sadie and said she's going first. He said he was going to spare me, because he liked me.
JA at 153.
After his meetings with the three girls and after obtaining their statements, Howell contacted Assistant Superintendent James Spisak to inform him of the situation and to begin the emergency removal process with respect to Zach. Spisak agreed that Zach should be removed from the school under § 3313.66 of the Ohio Revised Code because of the "continuing danger" he posed. In an effort to release Zach to an adult, Howell initially tried to reach Zach's mother, Bobbi LaCross, but she was unavailable. He then called Zach's probation officer, Jeffrey Hayes, who came to the school. At roughly the same time, Howell notified Officer Randy LePage and Detective Brian Harbin of the City of Cambridge Police Department about the matter.
When Hayes arrived at the school, Howell briefed him about the situation, told him that the police had been notified and showed him the three girls' written statements. Hayes asked Howell "whether these [girls] were reputable students" because he wanted to determine "whether it was somebody trying to get even with Zach or that type of thing." JA at 509 (Hayes Dep.). Howell confirmed the credibility of the girls' statements on the basis
Page 634
of their reputations as students. Hayes then called his supervisor, Jean Stevens, the Chief Probation Officer of Guernsey County, alerting her to the alleged threats, the girls' statements supporting them, the girls' reputations with Howell, the credibility of their statements from Howell's perspective, and the possible police investigation. Hayes told Stevens that Rhys was not at school that day and that police were looking for him. He then recommended to her that Zach be removed from the school. Stevens authorized Hayes to remove Zach from the school and to take him into detention at the Guernsey County Juvenile Probation Department.
At this point, Howell removed Zach from study hall and told him about the girls' allegations. In response, Zach confirmed that he knew about the note and acknowledged that Rhys (in his presence) had been "joking around" when talking to Gail Allen about the incident at Columbine, JA at 581 (Howell Dep.), but denied the rest of Howell's accusations, JA at 473 (Durbin Dep.). After the interview, Howell asked Hayes to escort Zach from the school. While Hayes claims that he did not arrest Zach at this point, he acknowledges that Zach was not at liberty to leave and that he handcuffed Zach in conformity with the probation department's policies. Hayes signed Zach out of the school late Friday...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kerr v. Hurd, Case No. 3:07-cv-297.
...immunity must be granted if the plaintiff cannot establish each of these elements. Williams ex rel. Allen v. Cambridge Bd. of Educ., 370 F.3d 630, 636 (6th In order for the violated right to be clearly established, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable offic......
-
Verhovec v. City of Trotwood, Case No. 3:14-cv-363
...immunity must be granted if the plaintiff cannot establish each of these elements. Williams ex rel. Allen v. Cambridge Bd. of Educ., 370 F.3d 630, 636 (6th Cir. 2004). In order for the violated right to be clearly established, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reas......
-
Dever v. Kelly, No. 3:06-CV-392.
...immunity must be granted if the plaintiff cannot establish each of these elements. Williams ex rel. Allen v. Cambridge Bd. of Educ., 370 F.3d 630, 636 (6th In order for the violated right to be clearly established, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable offic......
-
Lausin v. Bishko, Case No. 1:09 CV 512
...Sept. 28, 2007) ( citing Criss v. Springfield Township, 56 Ohio St.3d 82, 84, 564 N.E.2d 440 (1990)); Williams v. Cambridge Bd. of Edn., 370 F.3d 630, 642-43 (6th Cir.2004), quoting Trussell v. Gen. Motors Corp., 53 Ohio St.3d 142, 559 N.E.2d 732, 735 (1990). It is immediately clear that Pl......
-
Kerr v. Hurd, Case No. 3:07-cv-297.
...immunity must be granted if the plaintiff cannot establish each of these elements. Williams ex rel. Allen v. Cambridge Bd. of Educ., 370 F.3d 630, 636 (6th In order for the violated right to be clearly established, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable offic......
-
Verhovec v. City of Trotwood, Case No. 3:14-cv-363
...immunity must be granted if the plaintiff cannot establish each of these elements. Williams ex rel. Allen v. Cambridge Bd. of Educ., 370 F.3d 630, 636 (6th Cir. 2004). In order for the violated right to be clearly established, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reas......
-
Dever v. Kelly, No. 3:06-CV-392.
...immunity must be granted if the plaintiff cannot establish each of these elements. Williams ex rel. Allen v. Cambridge Bd. of Educ., 370 F.3d 630, 636 (6th In order for the violated right to be clearly established, the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable offic......
-
Lausin v. Bishko, Case No. 1:09 CV 512
...Sept. 28, 2007) ( citing Criss v. Springfield Township, 56 Ohio St.3d 82, 84, 564 N.E.2d 440 (1990)); Williams v. Cambridge Bd. of Edn., 370 F.3d 630, 642-43 (6th Cir.2004), quoting Trussell v. Gen. Motors Corp., 53 Ohio St.3d 142, 559 N.E.2d 732, 735 (1990). It is immediately clear that Pl......