Long Island Federal Judge Says Parents May Sue School, Classmates Over Alleged 'Disturbing Racial Attack'
The Moores were disappointed in the school's response, which failed to separate their son from three classmates who allegedly engaged in harassment.
September 17, 2019 at 01:46 PM
3 minute read
A lawsuit alleging racial harassment and threats aimed at an African American teenager on Long Island has seen several key claims surviving a defense motion to dismiss.
Plaintiffs Willie and Ursula Moore said their son was in eighth grade at East Islip's St. Mary School when he began receiving alarming images from three of his classmates through the chat site Discord, Long Island-based attorney Cory Morris wrote in a May 2018 complaint. The pictures targeted the student's race and referenced the KKK, Nazis and suicide, according to copies included with the complaint.
One picture allegedly contained a picture of a noose, which terrified the eighth-grader, according to Morris.
"There's only one thing a noose means to an African American," Morris said.
When the student finally brought the issues to his parents, Morris said, Ursula Moore acted fast. She reported the photos to St. Mary School staff members, local police and the Office of Civil Rights, Morris said.
But outside authorities considered it a school issue, Morris said, and the Moores were disappointed in the school's response, which they say failed to separate their son from the three classmates.
U.S. District Court Judge Denis Hurley of the Eastern District of New York agreed with the Moores' reaction in his order, which was entered in the week before Labor Day.
"While Courts should not second-guess school administrators' disciplinary decisions, this does not give the School Defendants carte blanche to fail to take any meaningful action in response to a disturbing racial attack that supposedly threatened violence," he wrote.
Joseph Nador of Patrick F. Adams PC, who is representing St. Mary School, its former principal and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Rockville Center, wrote in the motion to dismiss that the school did, in fact, impose some separation on the boys, including having one student eat lunch away from the main lunchroom and preventing the other two students from attending some after-school activities.
Nador wrote that the Moores did not claim the Discord harassment occurred at school, so the school lacked substantial control over the situation and therefore could not be held liable.
In its answer the school said that in its information and belief it could not say whether the alleged racial harassment occurred. Attorneys representing the three boys denied that they participated in cyberattacks against the Moores' son.
Hurley granted parts of the defendants' motion to dismiss, but he ruled the Moores could continue to pursue their case on the grounds that the school was negligent, breached its contract and showed deliberate indifference to student-on-student racial harassment while accepting federal funding.
He also found that the eighth-grader's claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress by his three classmates can survive, along with a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress by the school.
All the defendants quickly responded to Hurley's order, calling for the remaining claims to be dismissed.
Vesselin Mitev of Ray, Mitev & Associates, who is representing one of the three boys, said he's confident the remaining claims will be dismissed once more information comes out through discovery and depositions.
Nador and Stephen Ruland, a lawyer for Tierney & Tierney representing another of the boys, each said they had little to add to the response they filed in court. A lawyer representing the third boy did not respond to requests for comment.
The Moores' sons are attending different schools this year, Morris said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
'No Evidence'?: Big Law Firms Defend Academic Publishers in EDNY Antitrust Case
3 minute read'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readLippman Study on Antisemitism at CUNY Weighs Free Speech, Unprotected Acts
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250