Murray County Schools Response

8/2/2019 Murray County Schools Response

1/32

Page 1 of 32

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIAROME DIVISION

DAVID and TINA LONG, )

Individually, and as Natural )

Parents of TYLER LEE LONG, )

Deceased, )

)

Plaintiffs, ) CIVIL ACTION NO.:

) 4:10-CV-00015-HLM

v. )

)

MURRAY COUNTY SCHOOL )

DISTRICT and GINA LINDER, )

In her individual and official )

Capacity as Principal of Murray )

County High School, )

)

Defendants. )

_______________________________

ANSWER AND DEFENSES OF DEFENDANTS MURRAY COUNTY

SCHOOL DISTRICT AND GINA LINDER

COME NOW Defendants Murray County School District and Gina Linder,

in her individual and official capacity as Principal of Murray County High School

(hereinafter collectively referred to as Defendants), and respond to the

Complaint of the Plaintiffs by filing this Answer and further showing this Court as

follows:

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6 Filed 04/16/10 Page 1 of 32


2/32

Page 2 of 32

FIRST DEFENSE

For a first defense, Defendants respond to the enumerated paragraphs of the

Plaintiffs Complaint as follows:

PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

1.

Defendants admit that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 1 of

Plaintiffs Complaint that Plaintiffs are residents of Murray County, Georgia; that

they were the parents of Tyler Lee Long, deceased (Tyler Long) and that Tyler

Long was a person with a disability. Defendants deny the remaining facts as

alleged in paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.

To the extent paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such

legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial.

2.


Plaintiffs Complaint that Murray County School District (hereinafter referred to as

MCSD) operates the Murray County High School in Chatsworth, Georgia and

can be served with process through its Superintendant, although it has

acknowledged service. Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in

paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. To the



3/32

Page 3 of 32

extent paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal

conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial.

3.


Plaintiffs Complaint that Defendant Gina Linder (hereinafter referred to as

Linder) is the Principal of the Murray County High School and was at all

relevant times. Defendant Linder has acknowledged service of the Complaint. To

the extent paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such

legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial.

4.

Paragraph 4 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal

conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial. To the extent such a

response is required, Defendants deny that Plaintiffs have presented any viable

claims, either federal or state, and as such deny the allegations made and demand

strict proof thereof.

5.



response is required, Defendants deny that Plaintiffs have presented any viable



4/32

Page 4 of 32

claims, either federal or state, and as such deny the allegations made and demand


6.

Defendants admit the facts as alleged in paragraph 6 of Plaintiffs

Complaint.

7.

Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief

as to the truthfulness of the facts as alleged in paragraph 7 of Plaintiffs Complaint,

and therefore deny same and demand strict proof thereof.

8.


as to the truthfulness of the facts as alleged in paragraph 8 of Plaintiffs Complaint,

and therefore deny same and demand strict proof thereof.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

9.


Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long was a student at Murray County High

School. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a



5/32

Page 5 of 32

belief as to the truthfulness of the facts as alleged in paragraph 9 of Plaintiffs

Complaint, and therefore deny same and demand strict proof thereof; although

MCSD records indicate that Tyler Longs birthday was April 25, 1992, not April 4,

1992 as alleged in the Complaint.

10.


Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long was diagnosed with Asbergers Disorder and

that he had an appropriate Individualized Education Program (hereinafter referred

to as IEP) as mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act and

that the appropriate members of the Murray County High School staff were aware

of it. Defendants further state that the IEP that was put into place for Tyler Long

by MCSD allowed him certain accommodations that were not available to all

students at Murray County High School and that MCSD not only abided by the

IEP, but also provided him accommodations that were not required by the IEP.

Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in paragraph 10 of Plaintiffs

Complaint, and therefore deny same and demand strict proof thereof. Because

Tyler Long committed suicide at his home, the duty to protect him at his home

belongs to the Plaintiffs.



6/32

Page 6 of 32

11.


as to the truthfulness of the facts as alleged in paragraph 11 of Plaintiffs

Complaint in that the definitions of what is (or was) Asbergers Disorder are

(were) varied and the definition provided by Plaintiffs in paragraph 11 of

Plaintiffs Complaint is incomplete. As such, Defendants deny the facts as alleged

in paragraph 11 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof.

12.

No response is required of Defendants to paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs

Complaint. To the extent any response is required, Defendants deny the facts as

alleged in paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.

13.


Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long had an IEP in place regarding Tyler Longs

disabilities, but note that on February 3, 2006, Tyler Long was an 8th

grade student

at Gladden Middle School, not a high school student as alleged. Defendants deny

the remaining facts as alleged in paragraph 13 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand

strict proof thereof. Tyler Long was not constantly bullied as alleged in

Plaintiffs Complaint. On the occasions when he utilized the accommodations in



7/32

Page 7 of 32

his IEP allowing him to leave class to speak with a teacher or counselor regarding

stress that he was feeling due to interaction with another student, MCSD responded

swiftly and appropriately. Although Plaintiffs made allegations of constant

bullying after Tyler Longs death, subsequent investigations revealed that the

allegations made by Plaintiffs were unsupported or proven to be contrary to the

facts.

14.

Defendants admit the facts as alleged in paragraph 14 of Plaintiffs

Complaint but clarify their admission that the language quoted in paragraph 14 of

Plaintiffs Complaint is an incomplete quote from the Psycho-education report

form of April 26, 2006.

15.

Defendants deny the factual allegations contained in paragraph 15 of

Plaintiffs Complaint. Investigations revealed that the allegations made by

Plaintiffs were unsupported or proven to be contrary to the facts and that no brutal

and systemic pattern of bullying of Tyler Long occurred.



8/32

Page 8 of 32

16.


Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Long was not

ridiculed and emotionally bullied and physically beaten by other High School

students on a regular basis. Subsequent investigations revealed that the

allegations made by Plaintiffs were unsupported or proven to be contrary to the

facts.

17.


Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Subsequent investigations

performed regarding the incident alleged in paragraph 17 of Plaintiffs Complaint

determined the incident not to have occurred. During this limited time period,

MCSD communicated with Plaintiff Tina Long who repeatedly expressed

frustration both with Tyler Long and with dealing with his disability. Plaintiff

Tina Long also expressed sincere appreciation for Murray County School District

administrators stating that they had been of great help to her.



9/32

Page 9 of 32

18.

Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 18 of Plaintiffs

Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The investigation promptly performed

by MCSD at the time of the incident revealed that the incident at issue did not

happen as alleged. Nevertheless, the students found to be at fault for the incident

were assigned to multiple days of In-School Suspension and the incident was

turned over to the School Resource Officer (police).

19.


Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The investigation

performed by MCSD regarding the allegations made in paragraph 19 of Plaintiffs

Complaint determined that the incidents at issue never occurred. It is important to

note that during this time period, the school district had already assigned school

resource officers and administrators to monitor the lunch room in addition to

several regular lunch room employees.

20.


Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Defendants took

appropriate actions to fulfill their duties due to all students in Murray County High



10/32

Page 10 of 32

School, including Tyler Long, and provided him with all accommodations required

by the IEP that MCSD put in place for him.

21.


Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. While Tyler Long did eat

lunch with the teachers while he was in 8th

Grade at Gladden Middle School, this

was done at Plaintiff Tina Longs request and not in response to any complaint

about alleged bullying. While in high school, Tyler Long was provided with

accommodations regarding where he could eat, especially if he felt tense or was

not having a good moment per his IEP. However, Plaintiff Tina Long repeatedly

told MCSD that she did not want Tyler Long to use those accommodations unless

absolutely necessary. There was no extent and consistency of bullying

experienced by Tyler Long.

22.

Defendants deny that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 22 of

Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long was bullied at Murray County High School

and demand strict proof thereof. Defendants are without knowledge or information



11/32

Page 11 of 32

sufficient to form a belief as to the truthfulness of the remaining facts as alleged in

paragraph 22 of Plaintiffs Complaint and therefore deny same and demand strict

proof thereof.

23.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Plaintiff Tina Long participated in IEP

meetings in which accommodations were discussed and implemented as part of

Tyler Longs IEP. Tyler Longs situation was monitored in accordance with his

IEP. In addition, Defendants never refused to meet with Plaintiffs and promptly

responded to all inquiries.

24.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. On the rare occasion when

intervention was necessary for Tyler Long, members of MCSD intervened as

appropriate. There was no repeated or systematic bullying of Tyler Long and

MCSD provided a safe environment for Tyler Long. Tyler Long committed

suicide at Plaintiffs house, not at or on MCSD property.



12/32

Page 12 of 32

25.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Long was not bullied on a

regular basis nor would such behavior have been allowed. Defendants fulfilled all

legal obligations.

26.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The allegations made after Tyler

Longs death regarding the facts alleged in paragraph 26 of Plaintiffs Complaint

were fully investigated and it was determined that no such incident ever occurred.

In fact, it was further determined that one of the students mentioned in paragraph

26 of Plaintiffs Complaint, Z.H., was neither enrolled in the same guitar class as

Tyler Long nor even on the same side of the building when the alleged incident

supposedly took place.

27.




were fully investigated and it was determined that no such incident ever occurred.



13/32

Page 13 of 32

The teacher was present in the classroom at all relevant times and his office which

is adjoining to the classroom has a large glass window that allows the teacher to

see into the classroom when he is in the adjoining office.

28.




were fully investigated and it was determined that no such incidents ever occurred.

In fact, Tyler Longs lead teacher, who was aware of his disability and IEP

accommodations, saw Tyler Long on the afternoon of October 16, 2009 and noted

nothing unusual about Tyler Longs mood. Tyler Long even commented to this

lead teacher that he would see the lead teacher at Tyler Longs place of

employment two days later.

29.




were investigated by the Chatsworth Police Department who reported to MCSD

that no such incidents ever occurred. It is understood that the video footage of the



14/32

Page 14 of 32

school bus for the afternoon of October 16, 2009, which is in the possession of the

Chatsworth Police Department, shows that no student, including M.B. who is

named in the Complaint, bullied Tyler Long on that date and that the only

interactions on the video footage that are of note are Tyler Longs brother calling

him gay and Tyler Longs sister calling him stupid.

30.


Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long committed suicide in the early morning

hours of October 17, 2009. Defendants are without knowledge or information

sufficient to form a belief as to the truthfulness of the remaining facts as alleged in

paragraph 30 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and therefore deny same and demand strict

proof thereof. Only after the suicide did Plaintiff Tina Long provide Linder with

information regarding Tyler Longs pre-suicide state-of-mind; however, Tyler

Long committed suicide at Plaintiffs house and not on any property owned by

MCSD. Defendants also understand that Tyler Long left a note explaining the

reasons for his suicide.



15/32

Page 15 of 32

COUNT I: VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. 1983 DUE PROCESS

31.

Defendants incorporate their responses to paragraphs 1-6 and 9-30 as if fully

set forth herein and in response to the allegations contained in paragraph 31 of

Plaintiffs Complaint.

32.


Plaintiffs Complaint that Defendant Linder and Murray County High School

employees act under color of law. Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged

in paragraph 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof.

33.


Plaintiffs Complaint that Defendant Linder and other employees of MCSD had

actual knowledge of Tyler Longs disability. Defendants deny the remaining facts

as alleged in paragraph 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint, including but not limited to

any allegation that Tyler Long was subjected to systematic bullying and demand




16/32

Page 16 of 32

34.


Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof.

35.


Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. There was no obvious, flagrant,

rampant and continued bullying of Tyler Long at Murray County High School

and the investigations into allegations of Tyler Longs suicide provides the support

for such conclusion.

36.


Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Long committed suicide while

under the care, custody and control of Plaintiffs, not Defendants.

37.


Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. As demonstrated by the investigations

performed, there was no continual and pervasive bullying of Tyler Long. The

appropriate employees at MCSD were properly and adequately trained to

effectuate Tyler Longs IEP and investigated and responded as needed.



17/32

Page 17 of 32

38.


Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. As demonstrated by the investigations

performed, there was no continual and pervasive bullying of Tyler Long.

39.


Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. All appropriate policies and

procedures were in place to effectuate Tyler Longs IEP.

40.


Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof.

41.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Longs disability and his needs

were appropriately addressed by Defendants. As demonstrated throughout this

Answer, there was no ongoing bullying problem.

42.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.



18/32

Page 18 of 32

43.



COUNT II: VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. 1983 EQUAL

PROTECTION

44.

Defendants incorporate their responses to paragraphs 1-6, 9-30 and 32-43 as

if fully set forth herein and in response to the allegations contained in paragraph 44

of Plaintiffs Complaint.

45.



46.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. As demonstrated throughout this

Answer, there was no harassment, bullying and physical and emotional assaults

upon Tyler Long; nor was there an environment of abuse and bullying within

Murray County High School.



19/32

Page 19 of 32

47.



48.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. All appropriate school employees

were adequately trained.

49.



50.



51.



52.





20/32

Page 20 of 32

COUNT III: VIOLATIONS OF 29 U.S.C. 794 AND 42 U.S.C. 12132

53.

Defendants incorporate their responses to paragraphs 1-6, 9-30, 32-43 and

45-52 as if fully set forth herein and in response to the allegations contained in

paragraph 53 of Plaintiffs Complaint.

54.

Defendants admit that portion of the facts alleged in paragraph 54 of

Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long was diagnosed with Asbergers Disorder.

Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in paragraph 54 of Plaintiffs

Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. To the extent paragraph 54 of

Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not

require a specific admission or denial.

55.

Defendant admits that portion of the facts alleged in paragraph 55 of

Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long was a student at Murray County School

District, enrolled in Murray County High School and qualified for services,

programs or activities. Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in

paragraph 55 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. There was

no known bulling at Murray County High School. To the extent paragraph 55 of



21/32

Page 21 of 32

Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not

require a specific admission or denial.

56.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Long committed suicide at

Plaintiffs house, not on any property owned by MCSD.

57.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The investigations performed

confirmed that there was no continuous bullying, harassment and physical and

emotional abuse of Tyler Long at Murray County High School.

58.



response is required, Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 58 of

Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.

59.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The investigations performed



22/32

Page 22 of 32

confirmed that there was no constant bullying and harassment of Tyler Long and

at no time did Linder or any other MCSD employee act in bad faith or demonstrate

gross misjudgment. Only after the suicide did Plaintiff Tina Long provide Linder

with information regarding Tyler Longs pre-suicide state-of-mind; however, Tyler

Long committed suicide at Plaintiffs house and not on any property owned by

MCSD. Defendants also understand that Tyler Long left a note explaining the

reasons for his suicide.

60.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Long was provided a Free and

Appropriate Public Education as evidenced by the effectuation of his IEP. As

demonstrated throughout this Answer, there was no constant bullying and

harassment of Tyler Long.

61.







23/32

Page 23 of 32

62.



COUNT IV: PUBLIC NUISANCE

63.

Defendants incorporate their responses to paragraphs 1-6, 9-30, 32-43, 45-52

and 54-62 as if fully set forth herein and in response to the allegations contained in


64.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Defendants fulfilled all obligations to

Tyler Long and all other students at Murray County High School.

65.







24/32

Page 24 of 32

66.



67.



COUNT V: ATTORNEYS FEES UNDER 42 U.S.C. 1988

68.




69.





25/32

Page 25 of 32

COUNT VI: PUNITIVE DAMAGES

70.




71.


Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. It is with great sorrow that this tragedy

occurred, but neither MCSD nor Linder are liable for the suicide of Tyler Long that

occurred while Tyler Long was at Plaintiffs house.

72.



73.

No response is required of Defendants to the WHEREFORE paragraph of

Plaintiffs Complaint. To the extent that one is required, Defendants deny the facts

as alleged therein and demand strict proof thereof.



26/32

Page 26 of 32

74.

Any and all facts as alleged in Plaintiffs Complaint which have not been

expressly admitted by Defendants in this Answer are hereby denied and strict proof

of same is hereby demanded.

Second Defense

Plaintiffs Complaint against Defendant fails to state a claim upon which

relief can be granted.

Third Defense

No action or omission on the part of either Defendant proximately caused

the incidents at issue or the alleged injuries and damages of Plaintiffs, and

therefore Plaintiffs cannot recover from either Defendant.

Fourth Defense

Plaintiffs are barred from equitable relief by the doctrine of unclean hands.

Fifth Defense

Plaintiffs claim for punitive damages is unconstitutional in violation of the

Due Process Clauses of the United States and Georgia Constitutions.

Sixth Defense

Defendant Linder cannot be held liable in her official capacity.



27/32

Page 27 of 32

Seventh Defense

At no time did any of the challenged actions and behavior on the part of

either Defendant result in Plaintiffs being deprived of any rights, privileges or

immunities secured by the United States Constitution and laws or for any other

unlawful reasons and, therefore, Plaintiffs claims in this lawsuit are not actionable

under 42 U.S.C. 1983, the result being that Plaintiffs may not recover.

Eighth Defense

Defendant Linder in her individual capacity is protected by qualified

immunity as to any federal constitutional claims because, at all relevant times, she

was performing objectively reasonable discretionary acts as a public officer and

did not violate any clearly established federal right which a reasonable person

would have known.

Ninth Defense

Defendant Linder cannot be held liable for alleged violations of 504 and

the Americans with Disabilities Act and is not a proper party to claims brought

pursuant to these Code Sections. Defendants expressly deny there were any

violations of these Code Sections.



28/32

Page 28 of 32

Tenth Defense

Defendants are entitled to the defense of sovereign and official immunity as

to any claims alleged by Plaintiffs under Georgia law.

Eleventh Defense

Defendants cannot be held liable under 42 U.S.C. 1983 on the basis of

respondeat superior.

Twelfth Defense

Defendants, including Defendant Linder in her official capacity, are immune

from liability for punitive damages.

Thirteenth Defense

To the extent applicable, Plaintiffs alleged injuries and damages, if any,

were proximately caused by entities of persons other than Defendants.

Fourteenth Defense

The allegations set forth in the Complaint do not rise to the level of a

constitutional deprivation under color of state law and therefore do not support a

claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. 1983.



29/32

Page 29 of 32

Fifteenth Defense

Plaintiffs were not deprived of any federal, constitutional or statutory right

as a result of the application of any policy, practice or custom of Defendant Murray

County School District.

Sixteenth Defense

At no time did Defendants breach a legal duty to Plaintiffs, with the result

that Plaintiffs may not recover against Defendants.

WHEREFORE, having responded to the Plaintiffs Complaint, Defendants

respectfully request:

(a) that the Court enter judgment in their favor and cast all costs ofsaid action against Plaintiff;

(b) for a trial by jury of twelve (12); and(c) for such further relief as this Court deems just and proper.Respectfully submitted this 16

thday of April, 2010.

s/Wayne S. MelnickMatthew G. MoffettGeorgia Bar No.: 515323

Wayne s. Melnick

Georgia Bar No.: 501267Attorneys for Defendants Murray County

School District and Gina Linder



30/32

Page 30 of 32

GRAY, RUST, ST. AMAND,

MOFFETT & BRIESKE, L.L.P.1700 Atlanta Plaza950 East Pace Ferry Road

Atlanta, Georgia 30326

Telephone: (404) 870-7390Facsimile: (404) 870-1030

E-mail: [email protected]@grsmb.com

s/ Martha PearsonPhilip HartleyGeorgia Bar No.: 333987

Martha Pearson

Georgia Bar No.: 569375Attorneys for Defendants Murray County

School District and Gina Linder

HARBEN, HARTLEY & HAWKINS, LLP340 Jesse Jewell Parkway

Suite 750

Gainesville, Georgia 30501Telephone: (770) 534-7341

Facsimile: (770) 532-0399

E-mail: [email protected]@hhhlwayers.com



31/32

Page 31 of 32

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIAROME DIVISION

DAVID and TINA LONG, )

Individually, and as Natural )

Parents of TYLER LEE LONG, )

Deceased, )

)

Plaintiffs, ) CIVIL ACTION NO.:

) 4:10-CV-00015-HLM

v. )

)

MURRAY COUNTY SCHOOL )

DISTRICT and GINA LINDER, )

In her individual and official )

Capacity as Principal of Murray )

County High School, )

)

Defendants. )

_______________________________

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have this day I electronically filed theANSWER AND

DEFENSES OF DEFENDANTS MURRAY COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT

AND GINA LINDERwith the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system which

will provide electronic notice of the filing to the following attorneys of record:



32/32

W. Winston Briggs, Esq.

W. WINSTON BRIGGS LAW FIRM1005C Howell Mill RoadAtlanta, Georgia 30318

Jonathan Zimring, Esq.ZIMRING LAW FIRM

114 New Street, Suite K-1Decatur, Georgia 30030

Respectfully submitted this 16th day of April, 2010.

s/Wayne S. MelnickMatthew G. Moffett

Georgia Bar No.: 515323Wayne s. Melnick

Georgia Bar No.: 501267

Attorneys for Defendants Murray CountySchool District and Gina Linder

GRAY, RUST, ST. AMAND,

MOFFETT & BRIESKE, L.L.P.1700 Atlanta Plaza

950 East Pace Ferry RoadAtlanta, Georgia 30326

Telephone: (404) 870-7390Facsimile: (404) 870-1030

E-mail: [email protected]

[email protected]


Documents

Murray County Schools Response