Doe v. Tangipahoa Parish School System, et al, No. 2:2018cv12345 - Document 21 (E.D. La. 2019)
Court Description: ORDER AND REASONS: Granting 15 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. However, as to the extent that the Plaintiff's state court petition alleges any state law claims against the Defendant, these claims remain unaffected. Signed by Judge Jay C. Zainey on 9/6/2019. (ajn)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Doe v. Tangipahoa Parish School System, et al Doc. 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA JANE DOE CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 18-12345 TANGIPAHOA PARISH SCHOOL SYSTEM SECTION A (2) ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 30) filed by Defendant Tangipahoa Parish School System. Plaintiff Jane Doe has responded to this motion. (Rec. Doc. 19). This motion, set for submission on September 4, 2019, is before the Court on the briefs without oral argument. Jane Doe, a minor, alleges that in November of 2016, Dwayne Brown, an employee of the Tangipahoa Parish School System, physically touched her in a sexual manner. (Rec. Doc. 11, ¶ 2, State Court Pleadings). Plaintiff alleges that the Tangipahoa Parish School System was negligent in the hiring and training of Brown and it failed to provide and maintain a safe learning environment. (Id. at ¶3). Plaintiff filed a state court petition for damages due to a hostile education environment pursuant to Title IX, 20 U.S.C. § 1681(a). (Id. at ¶ 5). A jury trial is scheduled for March 23, 2020. (Rec. Doc. 20). Defendant Tangipahoa Parish School System now requests that this Court dismiss all of the Plaintiff’s 42 U.S.C. §1983 claims and punitive damage claims under Title IX against the Tangipahoa Parish School System. 1 Dockets.Justia.com Plaintiff concedes that this Motion for Partial Summary Judgment against the Tangipahoa Parish School System should be granted.1 More specifically, the Plaintiff concedes that there is no evidence that the Tangipahoa Parish School System implemented a formal policy that was a repudiation of constitutional rights and that it was the moving force behind the alleged constitutional violation at issue in this case. (Rec. Doc. 19, Plaintiff’s Opposition at 2). Further, the Plaintiff concedes that punitive damages are not available in private actions brought to enforce Title IX. Id. Thus, the Court is persuaded that the Plaintiff’s 42 U.S.C. §1983 claims and punitive damage claims under Title IX against the Tangipahoa Parish School System should be dismissed. Accordingly, and for the foregoing reasons; IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 30) is GRANTED. However, as to the extent that the Plaintiff’s state court petition alleges any state law claims against the Defendant, these claims remain unaffected. September 6, 2019 __________________________________ JUDGE JAY C. ZAINEY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE The Plaintiff explicitly recognized this fact by stating in her opposition that, “[t]he plaintiff does not have an [sic] valid opposition to the granting of the Motion for Summary Judgment.” (Rec. Doc. 19, Plaintiff’s Opposition at 2). 1 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
