Last August we blogged about a Title IX case against the Hilldale Independent School District in Oklahoma arising from the sexual abuse of the 14-year-old plaintiff by the band director. At that time, we noted that the case had survived the school district's motion for summary judgment and appeared to be headed for trial.
Since that post, the case did go trial. A jury agreed with the plaintiff that the school district did not respond reasonably to information it received that called the band director's conduct into question. It then awarded the plaintiff $150,000 in damages on her Title IX claim. The jury also awarded $150,000 on the plaintiff's claim that the school district subjected her to danger in violation of her constitutionally rights, another $150,000 on her claim that the school district's inaction impaired her constitutional right to bodily integrity (derivative of the right to liberty), and yet another $150,000 on a theory of negligent supervision under state law.
The school district then moved to dismiss or reduce the jury awards, arguing that the plaintiff received "duplicative recoveries by pleading alternative theories for the same relief." The court disagreed, reasoning that while each of the plaintiff's legal theories stems from the same set of fact, the harm alleged under each claim is distinct, and the jury was instructed to devise its award accordingly. Specifically, the court emphasized the the damages covered in the Title IX award is the lost educational benefits, which is different from the harm to plaintiff's personal security and bodily integrity that are protected by the Constitution.
The decision upholding the jury award is: J.M. v. Hilldale Indep. Sch. Dist., 2008 WL 4511872 (E.D. Okla. Oct. 3, 2008).
Showing posts with label Oklahoma. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Oklahoma. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Oklahoma school paying attention
Administrators at Westmoore High School in Oklahoma say they are taking the recent Title IX complaint filed by two sets of parents of softball players very seriously. Moore school district superintendent Debbie Arato said she is thoroughly reviewing the complaint which lists eight points of concern by the parents, including inequitable facilities.
Arato says the issue of the softball facilities, which the complainants claim are inferior to those used by the baseball team, is something they are aware of and had planned on addressing.
Nothing like a lawsuit to get people thinking about turning plans into actions.
Arato says the issue of the softball facilities, which the complainants claim are inferior to those used by the baseball team, is something they are aware of and had planned on addressing.
Nothing like a lawsuit to get people thinking about turning plans into actions.
Labels:
facilities,
Oklahoma,
softball
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Oklahoma update
Thanks to one of the plaintiffs (who emailed us) in the case of inequities regarding the softball team at Westmoore High School in Oklahoma we now know a little more. There is both a lawsuit pending and a complaint filed with OCR. I suspect we will hear more about this soon.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Inequality in Oklahoma softball?
It's hard to believe that there are issues of equity in softball in the state of Oklahoma. I mean, Oklahoma, where the College World Series is held every year. It's a state that would seem to prize softball. But apparently the value the sport has at the collegiate level has not had a universal trickle-down effect. (Not so surprising given the flaws of most trickle-down theories.)
Two sets of parents are complaining about inequities concerning the softball program at Westmoore High School. Specifically there are concerns over the amount of money spent on baseball versus softball and facilities.
The article linked above seems to use complaint and lawsuit interchangeably so I am not certain as to what exactly will happen next: an OCR investigation or a legal hearing.
Apparently (informal) complaints and concerns have been issued for over a decade with little change. One of the parents involved said this about the facilities issues:
"You look one way and see the baseball field. You look the other and see the softball field. Not much more needs to be said.”
It sums up perfectly the reason we have given in the past for the seeming surge in complaints related to softball: it's right there in front of your eyes. And administrators are being forced to open theirs.
Two sets of parents are complaining about inequities concerning the softball program at Westmoore High School. Specifically there are concerns over the amount of money spent on baseball versus softball and facilities.
The article linked above seems to use complaint and lawsuit interchangeably so I am not certain as to what exactly will happen next: an OCR investigation or a legal hearing.
Apparently (informal) complaints and concerns have been issued for over a decade with little change. One of the parents involved said this about the facilities issues:
"You look one way and see the baseball field. You look the other and see the softball field. Not much more needs to be said.”
It sums up perfectly the reason we have given in the past for the seeming surge in complaints related to softball: it's right there in front of your eyes. And administrators are being forced to open theirs.
Labels:
facilities,
Oklahoma,
softball
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Oklahoma Harassment Suit Survives Summary Judgment
A federal court in Oklahoma agreed that a jury should decide whether the Hilldale Independent School District is liable under Title IX for failing to protect the plaintiffs' fourteen-year-old daughter and another student from sexual abuse by the band director, Brian Giacomo. The district tried to argue that its response did not qualify as "deliberate indifference" necessary for Title IX liability to attach, but the court disagreed. A jury could reasonably conclude that the district should have conducted an investigation after the principal initially learned from another student that Giacomo was engaging in sexual conduct with students on a band trip. Instead, the district did not investigate or terminate Giacomo's employment for several more months, after the principal received copies of sexual comments Giacomo left on students My Space pages and other evidence. Noted the court, "Often, the minimum required response to avoid 'deliberate indifference' is for the school to conduct a legitimate investigation," which, a jury could conclude the district waited too long to do.
Decision is: J.M. v. Hilldale Indep. Sch. Dist., 2008 WL 2944997 (E.D. Okla. July 25, 2008).
Decision is: J.M. v. Hilldale Indep. Sch. Dist., 2008 WL 2944997 (E.D. Okla. July 25, 2008).
Labels:
harassment,
Oklahoma
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)