Photo: Shutterstock

A federal judge has ruled that the Philadelphia School District is immune from a lawsuit stemming from an incident where a student was allegedly choked by his special education teacher. The judge, however, determined that the plaintiffs should still be able to seek punitive damages against the teacher over the conduct.

U.S. District Judge Gerald Pappert of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted much of the school district’s efforts to dismiss the case, captioned Tucker v. School District of Philadelphia, finding that the plaintiffs failed to adequately plead their failure to train claims and that the school was immune from the intentional infliction of emotional distress, assault and battery claims.

Pappert, however, rejected arguments that the immunity extended to the teacher, given the severity of the alleged conduct, and ultimately held that the allegations were sufficient for the plaintiffs to present a range of punitive damages claims against the teacher.

“At this stage, [plaintiff Briana] Tucker has alleged sufficiently egregious conduct to seek punitive damages from [the teacher] under Section 1983,” Pappert said. “Punitive damages are also available on Tucker’s intentional tort claims.”

The alleged incident, according to Pappert, occurred in March 2018, when special education teacher Terrence Walsh allegedly grabbed the student, Jelani Christmas, who was in fifth grade, by his neck. According to the allegations, Walsh had become incensed because Christmas had not put his pencil back in the appropriate place. The complaint said that, after grabbing his throat, Walsh choked Christmas and then “repeatedly pushed [Christmas'] head and body against the school room wall.” The incident, according to the complaint, occurred during class and in front of other students.

Tucker, Christmas’ mother, sued the school and Walsh, alleging excessive force against her son, deprivation of equal protection, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and assault and battery.

Tucker contended that the school was deliberately indifferent to students’ rights to be free from excessive force because it allegedly failed to adequately train, supervise or discipline its employees.

Pappert, however, said the evidence presented showed that the school had a policy regarding excessive force and that Walsh appeared to have disobeyed that policy. Therefore, Pappert dismissed the excessive force claim against the school, but he gave Tucker leave to file an amended complaint.

“Tucker is free to amend her complaint one last time to the extent she can allege facts which support her conclusions and show that the school district was deliberately indifferent to the need to train, supervise and/or discipline its employees regarding physical restraint of students, and that this deliberate indifference caused Christmas’s alleged injuries,” Pappert said.

Pappert did not give Tucker leave to amend her other claims against the school.

Andres Jalon of Jalon & Associates, who represented Tucker, did not return a call for comment. Hannah Girer-Rosenkrantz was lead attorney for the school district. The district did not return a message left with its communications office.