California Business Litigation Blog

A Staten Island teacher was given a federal court ruling to allow her lawsuit against the New York City Department of Education to continue. The teacher was suspended after allowing students to use sexually explicit language within the classroom as the class discussed HIV/AIDS.

The teacher, Faith Kramer, was expelled for eight months for allowing the students to discuss sex openly in the classroom. Kramer has 26 years of experience in the teaching field. She held tenure at the school. Parents were outraged when they learned that the teacher had allowed such a conversation to take place. The school district required her to sit out eight months of teaching in one of the infamous "rubber rooms", which have since been shut down.

The ruling from Judge Jack Weinstein was lengthy. It contained some 67 pages of text and even included an appendix of the terms that the students used during the classroom discussion. Many of those terms were explicit and were slang terms. The attorneys representing the school stated that those specific terms were not suitable for use within a school setting.

Within his notes regarding his decision to allow the case to go forward, Weinstein stated, "Executing such a task would require great sensitivity, skill, commitment, and not a little courage…Based on the regulation, this teacher ought never to have been removed from the classroom." His statement was in reference to the way that the teacher interacted with the students, in that she treated the students as adults throughout the conversation.

Kramer has filed a $1 million lawsuit against the school district for their decision to suspend her. The funds also cover lost wages and embarrassment.

In Bedford County, Virginia, a Liberty High School senior has filed a lawsuit against school officials claiming that his rights were violated when the school district suspended him for sexting, the process of sending explicit material or words through text messaging.

The student, 18 year old Aaron Merkey, was suspended in March through the end of the school year. According to the school district, he sent a pornographic image to a female student through his cell phone. The lawsuit the student has filed claims that the school district’s punishment was too harsh and that his rights of due process were violated because of the disciplinary actions taken. Eight school board members, the superintendent and the principal are named as defendants in the case.

Merkey’s lawyer has filed a motion for an order to allow the student to return to school, through a preliminary injunction. In addition, he is suing for $100,000 in punitive damages against Liberty High School Principal Mary Brandon and $50,000 in compensatory damages.

Merkey was scheduled to graduate in early June and because of the lawsuit, the student is suffering from “embarrassment, humiliation, emotional anguish and public ridicule” from the suspension, according to the lawsuit. He also is unable to participate in sports activities and prom.

Neither the spokesman for the school or the school's attorney would comment.

However, within the lawsuit, the details of what happened are presented. On February 22nd, the school received a photo from a cell phone showing a woman’s buttocks with a caption under it reading “Have a nice day, A------.” The student forwarded the picture to another student, a female, who complained about it to the school. Merkey was then sent to the principal’s office and there admitted to sending the picture to the female student. Later, the message circulated throughout the school.

On February 24, the principal informed Merkey’s mother that the student was guilty of sending pornography through his cell phone and sexting. At that time, the student was suspended for ten days with a recommendation for suspension for the rest of the school year. According to the lawsuit, the principal told the parents that the suspension was harsh because Merkey sent the message to a female but had it been to just males, “boys would be boys” would be considered.

On March 8th, the superintendent ruled that the suspension should hold for the remainder of the school year. She also ruled that a four week review period would be used to determine if he could return to school after April 2nd. An appeal by the parents did not dissuade the school board from the decision. The school board also ruled that the student would be suspended through the end of the school year without the review that the superintendent had allowed.

The lawsuit says that the student was never made aware of his right to appeal the decision on his own, since he is 18. Further, it states that school district’s harsher punishment was driven by the principal of the school and her recommendation was based on discriminatory standards between the sexes. Additionally the lawsuit contends that Merkey, an honors student and varsity soccer player, was given a harsher punishment than one recently given to a student who brought a handgun to school.

Continue reading "Student Suspended Over Sexting Sues School" »

Free speech is the topic of discussion in a Greenwood, Indiana high school where the central Indiana school district is trying to allow a graduation prayer that the senior class voted to be allowed to be said. The problem is that the valedictorian of the school has filed a lawsuit in federal court claiming that the prayer and the vote for it are unconstitutional.

The school district says that if the court blocks the prayer, it could be seen as a violation of free speech. The request from the school district is brought on by the lawsuit filed by class valedictorian Eric Workman. He, along with the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed the lawsuit on Monday. He claims that the prayer is unconstitutional because it is a practice of majority rule.

The case looks to the courts to determine where the fine line is for the expression of religious values in schools. The ACLU states the organization’s reasoning behind overturning the earlier blocking of the prayer goes against Supreme Court precedent in similar cases.

The organization plans to allow for the students to have student led prayer unless a judge orders them not to do so. However, a ruling is scheduled to be made on April 30th. The school says that students voted to allow student led prayer during the graduation in September at an assembly. Students did not have to attend the assembly, nor did they have to vote. The practice of allowing prayer in the school setting changes year to year but in most cases, at least one student is allowed to lead a prayer during the opening remarks, though the prayer is said to be nonsectarian.

Also notable is that the school requires that all who speak during the graduation ceremony submit their speeches in advance for approval and that some do use religious themes within those speeches. The school does not forbid them from doing so.

The school district maintains that allowing student led prayer is not a violation as students are not compelled to participate in it. The school says that anyone not praying will be expected to remain quiet and respectful as is the practice when anyone speaks. The ACLU on the other hand, says that students who are still being subjected to the prayer and will feel compelled to participate, which would make it uncomfortable for Workman and others.