Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 1 of 3

5s31.6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
ROB MARRIOTT and DAWN MARRIOTT,
and 8.M., a minor, by and through his
next friend, Rob Marriott,

Plaintiffs,

)
)
)
)
)
)

v
USD 204, BONNER SPRINGS.

EDWARDSVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT,
ROBERT VAN MARENN KRISTI HOFFINE,
JERRY ABBOTT AND JOE HORNBACK,
Defendants

)
)
)
)
)

Case No.

(Removal from the District Court
\Myandotte County, 29th Judicial
District, Kansas Case No.16CV979

)

)
)

NOTICE OF REMOVAL
COME NOW the Defendants Bonner Springs-Edwardsville Unified School District No.
204, Kristi Hoffine, Jerry Abbott and Joe Hornback, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 51441 and D.Kan.R.
8 1.1,

and hereby give notice of removal of this action pending in the District Court of Wyandotte

Country, Kansas, to the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. In support of the
removal, Defendants state:

1.

On December 29, 2016, Rob Maniott, Dawn Marriott and B.M, a minor, by and

through his next friend, Rob Maniott, commenced a civil action in the District Court of
Wyandotte County, Kansas, bearing Case No. l6-CV-979, against Defendants Bonner Springs-

Edwardsville Unified School District No. 204, Robert Van Maren, Kristi Hoffine, Jeny Abbott
and Joe Hornback. V/ithin their Petition, Plaintiffs state a federal claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. g
1983 for alleged right under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution to

be free of unreasonable searches specifically asserting that they were unlawfully subjected to

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 2 of 3

videotaped surveillance while in a high school classroom. Petition, Count VII, pp.

2.

I5-I7.

Plaintiffs' Petition along with a summons were alleged to have been served on

Defendant Joe Hornback on or about January 8,2017, Defendants Bonner Springs-Edwardsville

Unified School District and Jerry Abbott on or about January 9,2017 and Defendant Kristi
Hoffine on or about January 20,2017.r

3.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Van Maren has not been properly joined

and served in this action and therefore is not required to
28

join or consent to removal at this time.

u.s.c. s 1446(bX2).

4.

Pursuant to Rule 6(a) of the Federal Rules

1446(b), this Notice

of Civil Procedure and,28 U.S.C.

S

of Removal is filed within thirty (30) days after receipt of the initial

pleading on which the aforesaid action is based.

5.

The above-referenced action is a civil action over which this court has jurisdiction

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 51331, and is an action which may be removed to this court by the
Defendants pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. 51441 and that this is a civil action involving a

federal

question.

6.

Plaintiffs' Petition filed

in the state court

action

is attached hereto

and

incorporated herewith.

WHEREFORE, the Defendants Bonner Springs-Edwardsville Unified School District
No. 204, Kristi Hoffine, Jeny Abbott and Joe Hornback respectfully request that the above titled
action be removed from the District Court of Wyandotte County, Kansas to the United States

District for the District of Kansas, and that this Court assume full jurisdiction over the

cause

herein provided by law.

I

By filing this notice, Defendants do not waive service or suffrciency of process or consent to personal

jurisdiction.

2

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 3 of 3

DESIGNATION OF PLACE OF'TRIAL
Defendants, in accordance with D.Kan.R. 40.2hereby designates Kansas City, Kansas as
the place for trial.

Respectfully submitted,

McANANY, VAN CLEAVE & PHILLPS, P.A.
10 E. Cambridge Circle Drive, Suite 300
Kansas City, Kansas 66103

Telephone: (913)371-3838

Facsimile:

E-mail:

(913)371-4722
ggoheen@mvplaw.com

By: /s/ Gresorv P.
Gregory P.

Goheen #1629I

Counsel for Defendants Bonner Springs-Edwardsville
Unifred School District No. 204, Kristi Hofhne, Jerry Abbott
and Joe Hornback

CERTIF'ICA

OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the
Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, and a true and correct copy of the above and
foregoing was sent to the below listed individuals on this the 24th day of January, 2017, by U.S.
Mail, postage pre-paid.
Sarah

A. Brown

Dan Curry
Brown & Curry, LLC
406 West 34th Street, Suite 810
Kansas City, MO 64lll

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

/s/ Gresorv P.

J

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 1 of 18

ELECTRONICALLY FILED

2016 Dec 29 PM 3:55
CLERK OF THE WYANDOTTE COUNTY DISTRICT COURT
CASE NUMBER: 201 6-CV-000979

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF'\ryYANDOTTE COUNTY, KANSAS
ROB MARRIOTT,

)
)

and

)

DAWN MARRIOTT,

)
)

and

minor, by
and through his next friend, Rob Maruiott
,a

)
)
)
)

)
)
)

Plaintiffs,

Case No,

)
V

)

USD 204, BONNER SPRINGS EDWARDSVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT
and

Division

)
)
)
)
)
)

ROBERT VAN MAREN, an individual
and

)
)
)
)

KRISTI HOFFINE, an individual

)

JERRY ABBOTT, an individual

)
)
)
)

and

)

JOE HORNBACK, an individual

)
)

and

)

)

Defendants.

)

PETITTON FOR DAMAçES
Come now Plaintiffs, and for thcir Petition for Damages against Defendants, state
follows:

as

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 2 of 18

L
residents

Plaintiffs Rob Marriott, Dawn Maniotl

of Olathe, Johnson County,

Plaintiff Dawn Marriott, and Plaintiff

2.

and

are citizens and

Kansas. Plaintiff Rob Maniott is curently married to

,

is his minor son,

Defendant USD 204, Bonner Springs

- Edwardsville School District (I.JSD 204)

is and was at all relevant times a public school district located in Wyandotte County, Kansas.
USD 204's central adrninistrative office is located at 2200 South 138th Street, Bonner Springs,
Kansas 66012.

3.

Defendant Robert Van Maren is an individual who was the Superintendent of

USD 204 during the years 2007-2013. He can be served at 918 S. 132nd Street in Bonner
Springs, Kansas 66012. He is sued in his personal capacity.

4.

Defendant Kristi Hofline is an individual who has been the Director of Seoondary

Instruction ftrr USD 204 during the years 2007 through the prcsent, She can be served at 515 E.
Spring Street in Bonner Springs, Kansas 66012. She is sued in her personal capacity.

5.

Jery Abbott is an individual who was the Bonner Springs High School principal

for USD 204 during the years 20A7-2009, and is currently the Education Foundation Director for
the school district. He can be served at USD 204's Central Office at22A S. l38th Street, P.O. Box

435, in Bonner Springs, Kansas 66A12.lle is sued in his personal capacity.

6.

Joe l"Iornback is an individual who was the Bonner Springs Fligh School principal

for USD 204 during the years 2009-2016, He can be served at 225 Warner Avenue in Bonner
Springs, Kansas 66012, He is sued in his personal capacity.

7,

On May 18,2016, Plaintiffs gave notice of their claims to Defendant USD 204

pursuant to K,S.A. 12-105b(d), More than 120 days have passed and accordingly, Plaintiffs'

2

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 3 of 18

claim is deemed denied because USD 204 failed to approve the claim in its entirety during that
time period.

8,

Jurisdictiorr and venue are proper as Defendants are doing business in Wyandotte

County, Kansas and the conduct giving rise to these causes of action took place in Wyandotte

County, Kansas, Accordingly, the District Court of Wyandotte County, Kansas has subject
matter jurisdiction over the oauses

of action alleged herein,

personal jurisdiction over all

defendants named herein, and venue is proper in this Court.

ÞACK.GROUND FACTS APPLICABLN TO ALL COUNTS

9,

Plaintiff Rob Maniott began to work at Bonner Springs High School in 2007

as a

science teacher. He received good teaching evaluations from his principal, Jerry Abbott, after the

completion of his first year.

10.

During the 2008-2009 school year, Defendant Abbott was the High

School

Principal, and Plaintiff Rob Maniott had Defendant Hoffine's daughter and Defendant Van
Maren's son in his science class. During that school year, there was a period of two weeks where

district administrators monitored Rob Maniott's classes every day. Marriott never received any
feedback from the administrators, nor were there ever any meetings regarding his teaching after
this two*week monitoring,

i1.

Defendant Hornback became the high school principal in the 2009-2010 school

year, and that same year Plaintiff Rob Maniott was promoted to Science Department Chair.

12.

During the next four school years, from 20i0 through 2014, Plaintiff Rob Marriott

taught and coached at Bonner Springs High School, and received good evaluations fiom his
Principal, Joe Hombaok and from the athletic director, John Hilton.

J

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 4 of 18

13.

In the 20Il-2012 school year, Plaintiff Rob Marriott was an assistant coach for

Track and the head coach for Cross Country.

14.

In the 2012-2013 school year, Plaintiff Rob Marriott was promoted to Head Track

15.

In the fall

Coach.

of 2014, atthe

end of the Track season: Rob Maniott resigned as the

Track and Cross Country Coach.

16.

During the years that Plaintiff Rob Maniott was a teacher and coach at Bonner

Springs High School, he would lock the door to his classroom after school and would change his
clothes for his coaching responsibilities.

17.

Mr. Marriott handled personal and private business affairs in his classroom when

he was not teaching students during his private planning period and after school,

18. Mr. Marriott

had private and confidential discussions with individuals

and

oolleagues in his classroom after school,

19.

While teaching in his classroom, Plaintiff Rob Maniott kept the door to his

classroom closed to prevent distractions and to establish a space where he, as a teachet, and his
students could establish a teaching and learning relationship with the requisite degree of trust on
the part of each for the other.

2A.

Plaintiff Dawn Marriott also used her husband's class room after school to change

her clothes when she came to the school to assist with timing duties at school athletic events. She
woul<l lock the door to assure privacy in the classroom afler school.

21.

i, a minor, was a student in the science classroom in20l4-2015,

and an athlete at the high school, and he also changed his clothes in his father's classroom after
school.

4

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 5 of 18

22.

Other members

of the coaching stafT also used Marriott's locked and secure

classroom to change clothes for their coaching duties after school.

23.

Upon information and belief, for one yeiir Marriott's classroom was used as

a

locker room for visiting teams to the Met¡o Classic Boys and Girls Basketball Tournament.

24.

In the 2014-2015 school year, there was an escalation of discipline problems in

the classrooms and hallways at the high school. Plaintiff and other teachers met in Marriott's
classroom to discuss the discipline problems and the need 1'or the administration to support them.

25.

During the summer of 2015, Plaintiff Rob Marriott resigned from his teaching

position at Bonner Springs Fligh School and then took a teaching and coaching position at
Leavenworth High School for the 2015-2016 school year.

26.

In late February 2016 or early March 2016, PlaintifïRob Maniott learned from

a

fellow teacher at Leavenworth High School that the Bonner Springs School administrators had
bcen secretly videotaping him in his science classroom at Bonner Springs Fligh School, and that
the IT personnel in I"ISD 204bad recently removed the camera that had been installed in the back

of his classroom at Bonner Springs High School.

27.
oflì<¡ials

On or about Ma¡ch 4,2016, Rob Maniott learned from another teacher that

in USD 204 had surreptitiously

placed a hidden video câmera in his classroom at

Bonner Springs High School in approximately 2009 and that officials in the school district had
been sccretly videotaping him, as well as everyone else

in his classroom from 2009 till

his

resignation in 2015.

28.

Plaintiff learned that Freddy Deleone and Mark Wiseman installed the camera in

his room under the direction of Ken Clark, the Director of IT,

5

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 6 of 18

29.

Upon information and belief, the video camera was secretly installed upon the

instruction and order of Superintendent Van Maren and Kristy Hof'fine. Both Van Maren and

I{offine are high-level administrators with superintendent authority and policy or rule-making
authority,

30,

Plaintifïs also learned that Jerry Abbotl, the High School Principal in 2009, told

high school administrators about the hiclden camera during a meeting in 2009 and that distrir:t
and high school administrators, including Defendant Homback, krew about

it

and watched the

video feeds. Defendants ratified its use by choosing to allow it to remain.

31.

Plaintifl's learned that School District IT worker Mark Wiseman had removed the

camera from Rob Marriott's former classrclom in December 2015.

32.

No other teacher had a video camera placed in his or her classroom during this

time fì'orn 2009 through 2015.

33.

Upon information and belief, the administrators eurd personnel in the school

district and at the high school, including curiculum director Leticia Porter, Information
T'echnology Director Ken Clark, former assistant principal and now principal Rick Moulin,
athletic direstor Doug Hitchcock, other assistant principals and administrators in the high school,
ancl

IT

personnel

in the

schclol district had access and opportunity

to view the

videotape

recordings from the hidden oamera installed in Plaintiff Rob Marriott's classroom.

34.

Plaintifß did not discover or reasonably ascertain that Defendants, and their

employees and agents, secretly videotaped them while undressing and changing clothes in the
Bonner Springs l{igh School classroom until late February or early March 2016.

35.

Plaintifß would never have changed their clothes if they had known there was

camera video-taping them in the classroom.

6

a

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 7 of 18

36,

Each of the Plaintiffs, as well as other teachers and students, had an expectation

of

privacy in Rob Marriott's science classroom at Bonner Springs High School, especially after
school.

37,

Plaintiffs did not consent to the clandestine video surveillance.

38.

Plaintiffs, teachers and students have an expectation for their physical, social and

psychological privacy while engaged in the activities of instruction, advising, counseling and
learning.

39.

Plaintifïs and student athletes had an expectation of privacy when the door to the

classroom was shut and they would change into or out of unifotms or coaching clothes'

40.

Each of the above-identified individuals had an expectation of privacy in the

classroom when the door was locked befbre changing clothes or closed for a private meeting or
conversation.

4L

Numerous teachers and students in Mr, Martiott's classes over the years, who had

ân expectation of privacy in his classroom, were secretly filmed without their knowledge.

42.

The right to privacy is grounded in the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the

United States Constitution's concept of personal liberty.

43.

'fhe constitution of the State of Kansas protects individual privacy interests in that

Section 18 of' the

Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the State of Kansas

provides that all

persons who suffer injuries to their person, reputation or property have a remedy by due course

of law,

44.

Def'endants knowingly and without lawful authority installed or used a concealed

photographic camera to secretly videotape, film, photograph or record by electronic or other
means, another, identifiable person under or through the clothing being worn by thal other person

7

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 8 of 18

or another, identifiable person who in a state of undress, for the purpose of viewing the body of,
or the undergarments worn by, that other person, without the consent or knowledge of that other
person, with the intent to invade the privacy of that other person, under circumstances in which

the other person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. K.S.A, $ 21-6101

45.

School administrators betrayed the trust of Plaintiffs by placing the hidden camera

in Maniott's classroom.

46.

Plaintifß have sulTered and continue to suffer emotionally and physically,

including difficulty trusting administrators and supervisors in public schoclls, as a direct result of
their discovery of the hidden camera,

COUNT ONE

47.

-

Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs in the Background Facts Applicable to

Al1 Counts of this Petition as

48.

USION UPON TIEC'I-USION INV ASION OF PRIVACY

if fully set forth herein.

Plaintiffs possessed a reasonable privacy interest in their solitude, seclusion

and

physical privacy interests.

49.

Defendants, and their employees and agents with access

to the video

feed,

intentionally interferecl with Plaintiffs' solitude, seclusion and physical privacy interests by
secretly videotaping Plaintiffs in Rob Mariott's science çlassroom.

50.

A reasonable person would

51.

Plaintiffs did not consent to the intrusions by Dellendants,

52.

The individual Def'endants' actions and/or inactions were outrageous or recklessly

be

highly offended by Def'endants' intrusive conduct,

indifferent and done in the course and scope of their employment with Defendant USD 204,
making Defendant USD 204 vicariously liable for such conduct.

I

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 9 of 18

53.

As a result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintiffs have suffered, and continue to suffer

great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of emotional
distress, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life;

were prevented arrd will continue to be prevented from performing daily activities and obtaining

the

full enjoyment of life;

have sustained loss of earnings and earning capacity; and/or have

incuned and will continue to incur expenses for medical and psychological treatment, therapy,
and counseling.

COUNT TWO - NEGLIGENCE

54,
to

PlaintifTs incorporate the above paragraphs in the Background Facts Applicable

All Counts of this Petition as if fully

55.

set forth herein.

Defendants' clandestine video surveillance equipment captured images of

Plaintiffs performing personal grooming or in various stages of dress and undress that exposed
their intimate parts.

56.

Defendants had a cluty not to violate K.S.A. $ 2l-6101(a)(6) which states:

(a) Breach of privacy is knowingly and without lawful authority:

(6) installing or using a concealed camcorder, motion picture camera or photographic
camera of any type, to secretly videotape, film, photograph or record by electronic or
other means, another, identifiable person under or through the clothing being wom by
that other person or another, identifiable person who is nude or in a state of undress, for
the purpose of viewing the body of, or the undergarments wotn by, that other person,
without the consent or knowledge of that other person, with the intent to invade the
privacy of that other person, under circumstances in which the other person has a
reasonable expectation of privacy.

57,

K.S,A. {i 21-6101 was intendcd to protect a specifìc group of people such

as

Plaintiffs, and not the general public.

58.

Defendants violated K.S.A. $ 2l-6101(a)(6), and were thereby negligent, when

they installed or used a concealed video camera to secretly videotape Plaintiffs and other

9

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 10 of 18

identifiable persons in a state of undress for the purpose of viewing the body or undergarments of
such persons without their consent or knowledge, with the intent to invade the privacy

of

such

persons who had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

59.

Plaintifls have individual private rights of action for injury arising out of the

invasion of privacy as intended by the Kansas legislature pursuant to K.S.A. $ 21-5105, which
states:

"Civil

remedies presewed.

l'his code does not bar, suspend or otherwise affect any civil

right or remedy, authorized by law to be enforced in a civil action, based on conduct which this
code makes punishable. The civil iniury caused by criminal conduct is not merged in the crime."

60,

As a <lirect result of Defendants' violation of K.S.A, $ 21-6101(a)(6), Plaintiffs

have suffered, and continue to suffer great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress,

physical manifestations

of

emotional distress, anger, embarrassment, loss

disgrace, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment

self-esteem,

of life; were prevented and will continue to be

prevented from performing daily activities and obtaining the
sustained loss

of

full

enjoyment

of life;

have

of earnings and earning capacity; and/or have incurred and will continue to incur

expenses for medical and psychological trealment, therapy, and counseling'

COUNT THREE _.NEGLIGENT SI_IPE,RVTSION OF EMPLOYEES

lllçfenttntt

61.

IJSD 2$4)

Plaintifß incorporate the above paragraphs in the Background Facts Applicable

to All Counts of this Petition as if fully set forth herein.

62.

At all times material hereto Def'endant USD 204 had

a duty to use reasonable care

in the supervision and monitoring of its employees and to prevent them from engaging in
negligent and/or intentional acts capable of inflicting injury and harm to others.

10

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 11 of 18

63,

Defendant USD 204 failed to supervise or monitor its administrative employees

who installed the secret video camera in Plaintiff Rob Marriott's high school classroom and who
videotaped, monitored or viewed the images lrom the video.

64.

Defendant USD 204 breached its duty of care, and was thereby negligent, in many

respects, including but not limited to the following:

a,

failing to supervise or monitor the conduct of its administratíve employees
who installed or placed a secret video camera in Plaintiff Rob Marriott's
classroom without his knowledge or consent;

b.

failing to appropriately supervise its administrative employees who monitored
the video feed from a secret video camera installed in Plaintiff Rob Maniott's
classroom without his knowledge or conscnt;

o, in other manners to be discovered throughout the course of discovery

and

litigation of this matter.

65, As a direct and proximate
monitoring

of its

result

of

Defendants' negligent supervision and

administrative employees, Plaintiff's sustained damages including but not

limited to financial damage, emotional distress, and mcntal suff'ering.

66.

As a result of'De1èndants' oonduct Plaintiffs have suffbred, and continue to suffer,

great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of emotional
distress, anger, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment

of lifè; were prevented and will continue to be prevented from performing daily activities

and

obtaining the full enjoymcnt of life; have sustained loss of earnings and earning capacity; and/or

have incurred and will continue to incur expenses for medical and psychological treatment,
therapy, and counscling.

11

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 12 of 18

COUNT FOUR

67,

- NEGLIGENT SUPERVISON

OF CHILD

I']laintiff incorporates the above paragraphs in the Background Facts Applicable

to All Counts of this Petition as if fully set forth herein.

68. Plaintiff
69. Plaintiff

.

was a minor at the times relevant herein.

was a student at a school of def'endant USD 204, and

he relied upon Defendant District 204 in the operation of its schools to provide for his safety,
care and protection.

70. Plaintiff

was

in the custody, supervision

and control of

Defendants when he was secretly video-taped.

71.

Defendants operated

in loco parentis with respect to Plaintiff while he was undet

the Defendants' custody, supervision and/or control.

72.

Defèndants owed Plaintifß a heightened duty to keep him safe.

73.

f)efendants breached their duty owed to Plaintiffs when they secretly videotaped
when he undressed and dressed to change his clothes for school athletics and

other school related events in the locked classroom.

74.
continue

As a result of the above-described conduct, Plaintiffs have suffered, and will

to sulfer great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional

distress, physical

manifestations of emotional distress, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation,
and loss

of enjoyment ol'life; were prevented and will continue to be prevented from performing

daily activities and obtaining the full enjoyment of life; and/or have incurred and will continue to
incur expenses for medical and psychological treatment, therapy, and counseling.

I2

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 13 of 18

ON OF' EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
COUNT FIVE _ NEGLIGENT
(Plaintiff Dawn Marriott)

75,

Plaintiff incorporates the above paragraphs in the Background Facts Applicable

to All Counts of this Petition as if fully set forth herein.

76.

Defendants had a duty of care to not secretly video Plaintiff without her consent.

77,

Def'endants breached their duty

of

çare when they conduoted secret video

surveillance of Plaintiff when she undressed and dressed to change her clothes to assist with
scho<ll athletics and other school related events in the locked çlassroom,

78.

Defendant USD 204's negligent failure to supervise and control the individual

l)efendants and the employees and agents who installed and then participated in the secret videotaping of Plaintiff was extreme and outrageous.

79,
agents

The individual Defendants'conduct, as well as the conduct of the ernployees and

of USD 204, was committed within the course and scope of their employment by

Defendant IJSD 204 and therefore Defendant IJSD 204 is vicariously liable for their conduct.

80.

Plaintiff sustained emotional distress accompanied by or resulting in physical

injuries,

81.

Defendants' negligent conduct was the direct and proximate cause of Plaintiffs

emotional distress which was accompanied by or resulted in physical injuries to Plaintiff.

82,

As a result of the above-described conduct, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to

suffer great pain of mind and body, shock, anger, medically significant emotional
physical manifestations

of cmotional

clistrcss, embarrassment, loss

of

distress,

self-esteem, disgrace,

humiliation, and loss of enjoyment of life; was prcvcnted and will continue to be prevented from
performing claily activities and obtaining the f'ull enjoyment of life; has sustained loss of eamings

13

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 14 of 18

and earning capacity; andlor has incurred and

will continue to incur

expenses for medical and

psycholo gical treatment, therapy, and counseling.

COUNT SIX

83.
All

- INTENTIONAL INF'LI CTION

EMOTTONAI, DISTRESS

Plaintiff's incorporate the above paragraphs in the Background Facts Applicable to

Counts of this Petition as

84.

OF'

if fully

set forth herein.

Defendants' secret video surveillance of Plaintiffs was committed with reckless

disregard f'or the Plaintiffs.

85,

Defendants' conduct was extreme and outrageous,

86.

The conduct of the indiviclual Defendants as well as the employees and agents of

Defendant IJSD 204 was committed within the course and scope

of their employment by

l)efenclant USD 204, and therefore Defendant USD 204 is vicariously liable for the conduct'

87,

Defbndant USD 204's failure to supervise and control the individual Det'endants

and the employees and agents who installed and then participated in the secret video-taping of

Plaintitß was extreme and outrageous,

88.

Defendants' conduct was the direct and proximate cause of foreseeable mental

distress for the Plaintiffs.

89.

Piaintiffs' mental distress was extreme, severe, medically diagnosable and

significant such that no reasonable person should be expeoted to endure it,

90.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' negligence, Plaintiffs suffered

past, present and future shame, humiliation, medically significant emotionai distress, loss of
enjoyment of life, lost sleep and anger.

91.

As a result of the above-described conduct, Plaintiffs have suffered, and continue

to suffer great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of

T4

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 15 of 18

emotional distress, embarrassment, loss
enjoyment of life; was prevented and

of

will

self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and loss of

continue to be prevented from performing daily

activities and obtaining the full enjoyment of life; have sustained loss of earnings and earning
capacity; andlor have incurred and will continue to incur expenses for medical and psychological
treatment, therapy, and counseling,

COUNT SEVEN

92.
All

-

SECTION 1983 DITPIIIVATION OF' CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
PRIVACY VIOITATION

Plaintiffs incorporate the above paragraphs in the Background Facts Applicable to

Counts of this Petition as

93.

if fully

set forth hcrcin.

Congress enacted 42 U.S.C.

$

19S3

to permit an injured person to recover in

federal court against defendants who violate a plaintiffs federal statutory or constitutional rights

while acting under color of state law.

94,

Defendant School off,rcials were acting under color

authorized the installation and operation

of

state law when they

of the video camera in Plaintiff Rob

Marriott's

classroom.

95.

Plaintiffs have a constitutional right to be free from unreasonable searches

protected by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

96.

Plaintiffs have a constitution right to of privacy pursuant to the due process clause

of the Fourteenth Arnendment to the United States Constitution.

97.

Plaintiffs' constitutional rights were clearly established at the time of

the

misconduct alleged herein.

98.

Defendants would reasonably be expected

constitutional rights,

15

to have

been aware

of Plaintiffs'

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 16 of 18

99.

Plaintiffs reasonably expected that no one, especially the school administrators,

would videotape them, without their knowledge, in various states of undress while they changed
their clothes in the classroom.

100. Plaintiffi did not expressly or irnplicitly consent to the surreptitious

video

surveillance in the classroom

101,

A reasonable person who knew or ought to have known of the video sulveillance

would be aware that what he or she was doing violated the F-ourth and/or

Fourteenth

Amendments.

102,

Defendant School District implicitly authorized, approved

or

knowingly

acquiesced in the unconstitutional conduct of the individual l)efendants.

103.

There is no qualifìed immunity available to Def'endants as Plaintiffs'privacy

rights in this context were clearly established.

104. The

actions and conduct

of

Defendants caused deprivation

of

Plaintiffs'

constitutional rights of privacy under the Foufth and/or Fourteenth Amendments to the United
States Constitution.

105.

The individual Defendants were "policy set1ing officials" for the school district.

106.

The School District offìcials violated PlaintifTs'privacy rights by the intrusion

upon seclusion in that the mere act and method of secret video surveillance would be highly
offensive to a reasonable person.

107. The School District

had actual knowledge that its superintendent and district

personnel engaged in this ongoing sureptitious video surveillance of Plaintiffs and others in

Marriott's classroom and endorsed it.

l6

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 17 of 18

108.
surveillance

The School District failed to train its administrators and officials regarding video

in the high school without intruding upon the privacy of teachers, students and

visitors,

109.

The School l)istrict had actual knowledge that any training

it

did provide its

administrators and ofhcials was completely ineffective,

110,

Defendants'conduct was wanton and

in

reckless disregard for the rights and

safety of Plaintiffs

111.

Defendants' conduct exhibited deliberate indifference to Plaintifïs' rights and

well-being.

ll2.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintifß

sustained

damages including but not limited to financial damage, emotional distress, and mental suffering.
1

13.

As a result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintifl-s have suffered, and continue to suffer

great pain of mind and body, shock, emotional distress, physical manifestations of cmotional
distress, angeï, embarrassment, loss of self-esteem, disgrace, humiliation, and loss of enjoyment

of lif'e; were prevented

ancl

will continue to be prevented fiom performing daily activities and

obtaining the full enjoyment of life; have sustained loss of earnings and earning capacity; and/or

have incurred and

will continue to incur

expenses

for medical and psychological treatment,

therapy, and counseling.

I14.

Plaintiff's are entitled to attorney fees and costs pursuantto 42 U.S.C $ 1988.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREF'ORE, Plaintiff's asks that this Court award judgment against Defendants

as

follows:

A.

Awarding actual, compensatory, statutory and any all special damages in favor of

t7

 Case 2:17-cv-02045-CM-KGS Document 1-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 18 of 18

Plaintifß and against Defendants for damages sustained as a result of the wrongdoings of
Defendants, together with interest thereon;

B.

Awarding Plaintiffs their costs and expenses incurred in this action, including

reasonable allowance

of fees for Plaintiffs' attorneys, experts, and reimbursement of Plaintiffs'

and counsel's expenses;

C.

Granting such other and l'urther relief as the Courl deems appropriate and just.
Respectf'ully Submitted,

BROWN & CURRY, LLC

/s/Sarah.A.. Brown
Sarah A. Brown, KS #12130

Dan Cuny, KS #22750
406 West 34rl' Strcel, Suite 810
Kansas City, MO 641l1
(816) 7s6-s4s8; (816) 666-9596 (Fax)
sarah@brownandcurry. com
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

JURY TRIAL DßMANDED
Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues triable in this case.
BROWN & CURRY, LLC
/s/Sarah A. Brown
Sarah A. Brown, KS #12130

Dan Curry, KS #22750
406 West 34(l' Stlcct, Suite 810
Kansas City, MO 641I I
(816) 7s6-sa58; (816) 666-9596 (Fax)
sarah@brownandcurry. com
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

18