Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 1 of 26 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
R.N., By and Through Her
Parent, R.T. and R.T. Individually,
Plaintiffs,
v.

1:19-CV-1922

FRANKLIN COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION and
THE BOARD OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES OF THE FRANKLIN
COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION,
Demand for Jury Trial
Defendants.
COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs, by counsel and for their Complaint against Defendants, allege:
Preliminary Statement
Plaintiff R.T. brings this action seeking redress for harms suffered by her disabled
daughter, Plaintiff R.N., who was subjected to discrimination, bullying and harassment 1 as a
result of Defendants’ intentional, knowing, deliberately indifferent, reckless and/or negligent acts
and omissions. Defendants have a policy, custom or practice of not addressing student-onstudent harassment in their schools, particularly when the victims are students with disabilities,
by failing to prevent or stop it from occurring even in the face of actual knowledge that it was
occurring. Specifically, Defendants created, fostered or permitted a hostile environment to exist
in R.N.’s school that deprived her of educational opportunities and benefits on the basis of her
disability.

1

Plaintiffs use the terms bullying and harassment interchangeably.

1

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 2 of 26 PageID #: 2

Parties
Plaintiffs
1. Plaintiff R.N. is a 14-year old girl who resides with her mother (Plaintiff R.T.) and
stepfather 2 in Franklin, Indiana. R.N. has a disability which adversely affects her
educational performance and is eligible for special education and related services under
Autism Spectrum Disorder (primary) and Language Impairment. R.N. is a “child with a
disability” as that term is defined by applicable federal law, including but not limited to
20 U.S.C. § 1401(3)(A); 34 CFR § 300.8. 3 She has been diagnosed with depression and
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and takes prescription medication to
manage her symptoms. As R.N.’s parent, R.T. is responsible for R.N.’s medical
expenses.
2. R.N. attends public school and at all relevant times attended schools owned, operated,
maintained, staffed and funded by Defendants and was transported to and from school on
buses owned or operated by Defendants.
3. Because of her disability, R.N. receives special education and related services through
Defendants’ schools.

Defendants
4. Defendant Franklin Community School Corporation (“the District”) is an Indiana public
school corporation which receives federal financial assistance. Its principal office is in
Johnson County, Indiana.

2
3

For simplicity, they will be referred to as R.N.’s parents.
As explained below, R.N. also fits the relevant definitions under ADA and Section 504.

2

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 3 of 26 PageID #: 3

5. Defendant The Board of School Trustees of the Franklin Community School Corporation
(“the Board”) is the governing body of the District. According to its Policy 0122, the
Board has control of the District’s facilities, programs, employees and students.
Defendants’ Written Policies on Harassment and Bullying
6. The District’s policy 1662 provides, in pertinent part:
It is the policy of the Board of School Trustees to maintain an…environment that is free
from all forms of unlawful harassment…occurring in the Corporation’s employment
opportunities, programs, and/or activities, or…affecting the Corporation environment
(hereinafter referred to collectively as “unlawful harassment”)...All students,
administrators, teachers, staff, and all other school personnel share responsibility for
avoiding, discouraging, and reporting any form of unlawful harassment…affecting the
Corporation environment.
The Board will vigorously enforce its prohibition against unlawful harassment…which is based
on…disability…or…classes protected by Federal and/or State civil rights laws (hereinafter
referred to as “Protected Classes”), and encourages those within the Corporation community as
well as third parties who feel aggrieved to seek assistance to rectify such problems….
All Corporation employees, including administrators, professional staff and support staff, shall
report any incident of alleged unlawful harassment…affecting the Corporation environment that
the employee observes or which is reported to the employee.
The Board will investigate all allegations of unlawful harassment…affecting the Corporation
environment and, in those cases where unlawful harassment is substantiated, the Board will take
immediate steps to end the harassment, prevent its recurrence, and remedy its effects….
7. District policy 1662 contains the following definitions:
Bullying
Bullying rises to the level of unlawful harassment…when one (1) or more persons
systematically and chronically inflict physical hurt or psychological distress on one (1) or
more students with the intent to harass, ridicule, humiliate, intimidate or harm that/those
student(s), and that bullying is based upon sex, race, color, national origin, religion, or
disability, that is, characteristics that are protected by Federal civil rights laws. It is
defined as any unwanted and repeated written, verbal, or physical behavior, including any
threatening, insulting, or dehumanizing gesture, by an adult or student, that is severe or
pervasive enough to create an intimidating, hostile, or offensive educational environment;
cause discomfort or humiliation; or unreasonably interfere with the individual’s school
performance or participation; and may involve: (a) teasing; (b) threats; (c) intimidation;
(d) stalking; (e) cyberstalking; (f) cyberbullying; (g) physical violence; (h) sexual
violence; (i) theft; (j) sexual, religious, or racial harassment; (k) public humiliation; or (l)
3

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 4 of 26 PageID #: 4

destruction of property. In the bullying context, "harassment" means any threatening,
insulting, or dehumanizing gesture…or written, verbal or physical conduct directed
against a student that: (a) places a student in reasonable fear of harm to his/her person or
damage to his/her property; (b) has the effect of substantially interfering with a student’s
educational performance, opportunities, or benefits; or (c) has the effect of substantially
disrupting the orderly operation of a school.

8. District policy 5517 provides, in pertinent part:
General Policy Statement
It is the policy of the Board of School Trustees to maintain an education…environment
that is free from all forms of unlawful harassment…occurring in the Corporation’s educational
opportunities, programs, and/or activities….This commitment applies to all Corporation
operations, educational opportunities, programs, and activities. All students, administrators,
teachers, staff, and all other school personnel share responsibility for avoiding, discouraging, and
reporting any form of unlawful harassment occurring in the Corporation’s educational
opportunities, programs, and/or activities….
The Board will vigorously enforce its prohibition against unlawful harassment…that is based on
race, color, national origin, sex…religion, disability…or…classes protected by Federal and/or
State civil rights laws…and encourages those…who feel aggrieved to seek assistance to rectify
such problems…affecting the Corporation environment.
All Corporation employees…shall report any incident of alleged unlawful harassment…that the
employee observes or which is reported to the employee.
The Corporation will investigate all allegations of unlawful harassment…and, in those cases
where unlawful harassment is substantiated, will take immediate steps to end the harassment,
prevent its recurrence, and remedy its effects.
Individuals who are found to have engaged in unlawful harassment…will be subject to
appropriate disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment or expulsion
from school.
Furthermore, Corporation employees who fail to report any incident of alleged unlawful
harassment…that the employee observes or which is reported to the employee also are subject to
appropriate disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment….

4

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 5 of 26 PageID #: 5

9. District policy 5517.01 provides, in pertinent part:
5517.01 - BULLYING
…Bullying behavior toward a student…is strictly prohibited and will not be tolerated.
This prohibition includes physical, verbal, and psychological abuse as provided herein.
The Board will not tolerate any gestures, comments, threats, or actions which cause or
threaten to cause bodily harm or personal degradation….
Bullying as defined in State law means overt, unwanted, repeated acts or gestures, including
verbal or written communications or images transmitted in any manner (including digitally or
electronically), physical acts committed, aggression, or any other behaviors committed by a
student or group of students against another student with the intent to harass, ridicule, humiliate,
intimidate, or harm the other student and create for the targeted student an objectively hostile
school environment that: (a) places the targeted student in reasonable harm to the targeted
student’s person or property; (b) has a substantially detrimental effect on the targeted student’s
physical or mental health; (c) has the effect of substantially interfering with the targeted student’s
academic performance; or (d) has the effect of substantially interfering with the targeted
student’s ability to participate in or benefit from the services, activities, and privileges provided
by the school.
This type of behavior is a form of harassment, although it need not be based on any of the
legally protected characteristics, such as sex, race, color, national origin, marital status, or
disability. It includes, but is not limited to, such behaviors as stalking, intimidation,
menacing behavior, coercion, name-calling, taunting, making threats, and hazing….
Any student who believes s/he has been or is currently the victim of bullying should
immediately report the situation to the building principal or assistant principal or the
Superintendent. The student also may report concerns to a teacher or counselor who will be
responsible for notifying the appropriate administrator or Board official. This report may be
made anonymously. A parent may file a complaint on behalf of a student in the same manner.
Every student is encouraged, and every staff member is required, to report any situation
that they believe to be bullying behavior directed toward a student….
All complaints about bullying behavior that may violate this policy shall be promptly
investigated according to the timeline established by the Superintendent's administrative
guidelines.
If, during an investigation of reported acts of bullying and/or harassment, the investigator
believes that the reported misconduct may have created a hostile learning environment
and may have constituted unlawful discriminatory harassment based on sex, race, color,
national origin, religion, or disability, the investigator will report the act of bullying
and/or harassment to one (1) of the Compliance Officers so that it may be investigated in
accordance with the procedures set forth in Policy 5517 – Anti-Harassment.
5

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 6 of 26 PageID #: 6

If the investigator finds an instance of bullying behavior has occurred, prompt and
appropriate action or responses shall be taken to address the behavior wherever it occurs
including, as appropriate, disciplinary action, up to and including expulsion for
students…. Bullying acts shall be reported to law enforcement officials immediately upon
determining that a report to law enforcement is necessary.
The parents of the targeted student and the reported bully shall be notified of the alleged
bullying incident at the beginning of the investigation, the findings of the investigation at
the conclusion of the investigation, and, as appropriate, any remedial action that has been
or will be taken to the extent disclosure is permitted by law. In addition to discipline,
remedial action may include support services for the targeted student and bullying
education for the bully, among other actions.

Defendants’ Actual Custom or Practice Relating to Harassment and Bullying
10. While Defendants’ written policies purporting to condemn bullying and other forms of
student-on-student harassment appear well-intentioned, unfortunately they are not
reflected in the manner that Defendants address (or fail to address) the bullying which
occurs in their schools on a regular basis—which supports a reasonable inference that
Defendants either condone such conduct or are deliberately indifferent to its occurrence.
11. One of the reasons that a hostile educational environment is allowed to exist in
Defendants’ schools is because of their failure to properly train their employees on the
implementation and enforcement of their own written policies, resulting in their
employees’ ignorance of those policies.
12. The need for school districts to train their employees on such policies is self-evident,
even obvious.

6

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 7 of 26 PageID #: 7

13. Defendants’ failure to train their employees on these policies constitutes deliberate
indifference to R.N.’s civil rights, specifically including but not limited to her right to be
educated in an environment which is not hostile. 4
14. Defendants’ deliberate indifference to the need to train their employees on these policies
resulted in the deprivation of R.N.’s civil rights.
15. Defendants’ custom or practice of not training their employees on their own written
policies and their failure to take appropriate steps to address bullying in their schools
amount to an official policy.
Jurisdiction
16. This Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ claims arising under the Constitution or laws
of the United States pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This
Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state law claims pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1367. Plaintiffs have exhausted their administrative remedies to the extent
required 5 and served timely Notices of Tort Claim pursuant to state law.
Venue
17. Venue is in this District pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because Defendants maintain their
principal offices in this judicial district.

The identity of individual employee(s) of Defendants having final policymaking authority in this area is presently
unknown. Once Plaintiffs ascertain the identity of such individuals through discovery, they reserve the right to
amend the Complaint to name them as defendants.
5
By requesting a Due Process hearing asserting claims arising under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA).
4

7

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 8 of 26 PageID #: 8

Allegations Common to All Counts
18. Despite her disability, R.N. is a bright girl and wants what every child her age wants: to
fit in, be accepted and liked. Unfortunately, she was the victim of a lengthy, severe and
pervasive campaign of verbal and physical harassment by other students at school and on
the school bus. Even more unfortunately, despite having actual knowledge that R.N. was
being bullied and of the significant harmful effects which it was having upon R.N.,
Defendants looked the other way and failed to take appropriate measures to prevent or
stop the bullying or discipline the perpetrators.
19. The other students’ intentional or willful misconduct directed toward R.N. meets
Defendants’ definitions of harassment and bullying as well as Indiana law.
20. At all relevant times, Defendants had lawful disciplinary authority over the perpetrators
because they were students on Defendants’ property (school grounds or school buses) and
the harassment occurred on school property during school hours. Therefore, Defendants
exercised substantial control over the circumstances which led to the harassment and/or
the conditions where the harassment was perpetrated.
21. One of the reasons, if not the main reason, that R.N. was targeted for bullying was
because she has autism. As a result, she is perceived—and treated—by other students and
by Defendants’ employees as “different.”
22. Upon information and belief, there is a longstanding and systemic bullying problem at
schools operated by Defendants and the severity of the bullying is worse for students with
disabilities than it is for their peers in general education.
23. Defendants’ widespread custom or practice of allowing bullying in their schools has sent
a message that students who harass their peers will not face serious consequences. This

8

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 9 of 26 PageID #: 9

has fostered a culture of passivity, even tolerance, on the part of school staff which leads
students to engage in such conduct because they know that they can get away with it.
24. As a result of this institutional tolerance of bullying in their schools, since 2015 R.N. has
been subjected to an ongoing campaign of bullying on Defendants’ property, both at
school and on the school bus.
25. Although bullying of any student is unacceptable, because of her disability R.N. belongs
to a “protected class” as that term is defined by Defendants’ own written policies and by
federal and Indiana law.
26. R.N.’s treatment by other students at school and on the bus constitutes “unlawful
harassment,” “disability harassment” and “bullying” as those terms are defined by
Defendants’ own written policies and under federal and Indiana law.
27. In an effort to put a stop to the bullying, both R.N. and her parents reported the ongoing
and repeated harassment of R.N. to the appropriate school personnel on numerous
occasions pursuant to Defendants’ written policy.
28. In addition to being teased and called names at school, R.N. was relentlessly tormented,
physically kicked, punched and hit by other students. At school and on social media,
other students would say things to her like “You should die,” and one or more students
told R.N. to “dig a hole and bury yourself,” to die of cancer and go die in a fiery crash.
Other students laughed at her, kicked her and told her that her mother was an “asshole”
for having and loving a child like her.
29. Before she started being bullied by other students, R.N. used to love going to school,
loved her teachers and looked forward to spending time at school every day. However,

9

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 10 of 26 PageID #: 10

the bullying created a hostile environment at school and on the school bus. As a result,
R.N. no longer feels safe at school or on the school bus.
30. Eventually (and not surprisingly), the relentless campaign of harassment took its toll on
R.N. It damaged her self-esteem and made her feel scared, helpless and depressed. She
started coming home saying “I got bullied today,” on practically a daily basis. Her
stomach hurt, she would be up worrying in the middle of the night about what the next
day held and awakened her parents to tell them that she was afraid of being bullied the
next day. She told them “I don't want to go to school,” and “I want to be home schooled.”
31. Defendants’ teachers and administrators (see fn. 3, supra) were aware that R.N. was
being bullied but took no action as she slipped further into depression.
32. Defendants’ employees have known about this situation for years. When R.N. was in 5th
grade, Defendants developed an Individualized Education Program (IEP) for her dated
1/26/16. In the “Concerns of the parent” section of the IEP, it states that R.N. comes
home saying that she hates school, wants to be home schooled and that she “feels
bullied.”
33. In addition to R.N.’s numerous reports of being bullied made to Defendants’ employees
over a period of time, her parents have communicated with various school administrators
and staff about the bullying on several occasions, including but not limited to sending at
least two employees of Defendants an email on or about April 24, 2017 stating that R.N.
“seems to have become a target this year more than any other school year,” that she was
coming home and telling her parents that she had been bullied on a daily basis, that she
was complaining of stomachaches and waking up in the middle of the night, that she was
being subjected to “ongoing treatment by a select few students at school,” that the parents

10

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 11 of 26 PageID #: 11

had watched her cry and heard her say “I don’t feel like I want to live anymore” because
someone had told her that she “should kill herself.”
34. On more than one occasion, the parents also explained to one or more of Defendants’
employees that R.N. had told them “I don't want to go to school” or “I want to be home
schooled,” that she had been up in the middle of the night and had awakened them with
concerns about getting bullied the next day.
35. R.N.’s parents told Defendants that “we feel as if we are sending our child off to a war
zone” every day when they sent her to school.
36. The parents also informed Defendants’ employees that “you have a bullying problem at
your school,” and asked them what Defendants planned to do to keep R.N. safe.
37. On or about April 26, 2017, an employee of Defendants sent R.N.’s parent(s) an email
mentioning “the 5 students who make her feel unsafe.”
38. Employees of Defendants (including school administrators with disciplinary authority)
knew that R.N. was being bullied at school, yet they failed to take reasonable measures to
prevent it or to stop it from happening.
39. In addition to the bullying causing or exacerbating R.N.’s symptoms of depression, R.N.
developed a school-based anxiety disorder as a result of the harassment which she
experienced at school.
40. R.N. had trouble sleeping and began having auditory and visual hallucinations.
Eventually, R.N. became so depressed that she developed suicidal thoughts, at one point
telling an adult that she believed that going to Heaven would cure her autism.
41. In the spring of 2017, R.N. wrote a suicide note. Her parents reported this to one or more
employees of Defendants, who downplayed it and told them that R.N. had written the

11

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 12 of 26 PageID #: 12

note for attention. When the parents showed the suicide note to R.N.’s teacher, she called
it an example of “Classic R.N. overreaction.”
42. Unfortunately, this cavalier and dismissive attitude was typical of Defendants’ response
to the bullying of R.N. which was occurring—and being reported to Defendants—on a
regular basis.
43. Beyond just ignoring it, employees of Defendants blamed R.N. or her parents for her
being bullied and questioned why she was allowed to use social media.
44. Defendants’ suggestions for dealing with the bullying included providing R.N. a visual
cue to “close the door” and pretend it was not happening, defend herself or see the school
counselor.
45. In the afternoon of May 15, 2017, after R.N. got home from school and before her
parents got home, she attempted to commit suicide by overdosing on prescription
medications. After R.T. got home that evening, R.N. said that she wanted to take a
shower to get the bullies out of her head, then told R.T. that she had done something to
make herself feel better about the bullying.
46. R.N. told her parents that she “had a headache from all the things the bullies said to her,”
and that she had taken “medicine” to make her headache go away. When R.T. noticed
that R.N. appeared to be under the influence of something, she asked her what medicine
she had taken then called 911.
47. R.N. was transported by ambulance to Franciscan Hospital where she is reported to have
told Emergency Department staff “They pushed me at school today.” She was later
transferred to and admitted as an inpatient at Valle Vista Hospital. Her discharge

12

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 13 of 26 PageID #: 13

diagnoses were Major Depressive Disorder, recurrent, severe with psychosis; Autism
Spectrum Disorder; ADHD and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Her prognosis was fair.
48. The parents sent an email to the school Principal, Dave Beck, in May 2017 asking
questions about Defendants’ bullying policy. At a meeting on or about May 30, 2017, the
Principal told them that the incidents of harassment which had been reported by R.N.
were not considered bullying because they did not involve multiple incidents committed
by the same student.
49. Mr. Beck told the parents, “You don’t understand the definition of bullying.” According
to him, this conduct did not meet the definition of bullying under Indiana law because
they were not “repeated acts or gestures.” Apparently, he believed that unless one person
engages in identical behavior two or more times, it is not considered bullying.
50. In response to the parents’ email, the Principal informed them that Defendants had
investigated R.N.’s reports and “found there are no substantiated bullying incidents.”
51. On or about May 31, 2017, the parents sent an email to Defendants’ Principal, Dave Beck
(and copied two other employees of Defendants), asking him to explain Defendants’
policy for handling bullying complaints by students and under what circumstances
Defendants would notify parents that their child had reported being bullied. The parents
specifically took issue with Principal Beck’s position that the incidents which had been
reported by R.N. did not constitute bullying because they were not “repeated behavior”
by the same student. The parents expressed their disbelief at Mr. Beck’s position and
explained that R.N. had attempted suicide because she was being bullied and this had
been reported to employees of Defendants.

13

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 14 of 26 PageID #: 14

52. In response to the parents’ email, Mr. Beck sent them copies of Defendants’ anti-bullying
policy, implying that answers to the parents’ questions could be found there. Calling
R.N.’s reports instances of “alleged bullying,” Mr. Beck then told the parents that
Defendants had investigated them and “based on these findings, and the Indiana Code
definition of bullying 6, we found there are no substantiated bullying incidents.” He then
acknowledged that “inappropriate behaviors” had occurred.
53. Instead of welcoming any questions or feedback or offering to make himself available for
a phone call or meeting with the parents to discuss their concerns, Mr. Beck’s email
closed with the comment “This correspondences [sic] serves as the conclusion of our
findings. I want to wish R.N. and family the very best.” In other words, this conversation
is over.
54. Mr. Beck copied Defendants’ Superintendent, David Clendening, on his email to R.N.’s
parents.
55. Mr. Beck did not address whether the “alleged” incidents reported by R.N. constitute
bullying as that term is defined by Defendants’ policies.
56. In June of 2017, another parent sent an email to Jennifer George, Defendants’ school
counselor, informing her that other students had been making fun of R.N. and told her to
“go kill yourself.”
57. In or around August of 2017, one or more employees of Defendants reported R.N.’s
parents to the Indiana Department of Child Services (DCS), which dispatched a
caseworker to the family’s residence to interview them. The complaint was determined

6

It is unknown whether Mr. Beck is an attorney or consulted one before reaching this conclusion.

14

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 15 of 26 PageID #: 15

unsubstantiated; however, as a result of the DCS investigation, R.N. no longer felt
comfortable confiding in school staff.
58. In or around October 2017, R.N. was talking to a friend about her suicide attempt in May.
That friend apparently told another friend who told her grandmother, who informed
Defendants. It was after school and Defendants’ staff were unable to make phone contact
with R.N. or her parents. Defendants did not leave the parents a voicemail message when
they were unable to make phone contact with them; however, Defendants did make
contact with R.N.’s biological father in Richmond, Indiana. Defendants’ school resource
officer (SRO) requested that his department have a unit do welfare check on her. Police
were dispatched to the family residence, where they discovered R.N. and her sister in no
apparent danger of harm.
59. In early April 2018, R.N.’s parents met with school personnel to discuss ways to help her
cope with her feelings.
60. R.N. knew another student who used to attend school in Defendants’ district. She had
also been bullied at school and moved to another district in order to get away from the
bullying, but even after she moved, other students continued to bully her on social media.
She committed suicide in April 2018 and R.N. went to her funeral. R.N.’s parents hoped
that R.N. seeing the friend’s body at the viewing would bring home the message that
suicide is permanent.
61. One morning in April 2018, R.N. cut herself with a razor because, she said, “the physical
pain hurts less than the school pain.”

15

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 16 of 26 PageID #: 16

62. During a two-hour session with her private counselor, R.N. described her plan to commit
suicide. At one point she talked about shooting herself, cutting, taking pills, hanging
herself with a belt or drinking bleach to “wash out the bad thoughts.”
63. She was taken to the Community Hospital North Behavioral Center for evaluation and
reported that she wanted to quit school because she did not feel safe or happy there. She
was discharged to home with a safety plan.
64. R.N. participated in a social skills group at school. In April 2018, a male student in her
social skills group pushed R.N. and threatened to stab her at school. For some reason,
Defendants did not report the incident to police. When the parents asked the Principal
whether Defendants had filed a police report, she said no. When they asked her why not,
the Principal said that the other student would not carry out his threat, that he was a good
student and that he had never been in trouble.
65. On April 17, 2018, the parents sent employees of Defendants an email questioning their
handling of the incident and asking that the male student not be allowed to sit at R.N.’s
table during lunch.
66. Since Defendants did not report the incident to police, R.N.’s parents did so.
67. Franklin police dispatched an officer to the school, where he spoke with R.T. After
speaking with school personnel, the officer told the R.T. “this sounds like it was blown
out of proportion.”
68. The Principal asked R.N.’s parents if they were comfortable having her continue in the
social skills group with the other student, suggesting that they should withdraw her from
it if they were not. In response to this suggestion, the parents asked why R.N. should have
to leave the group instead of the student who assaulted her. The parents wanted R.N. to

16

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 17 of 26 PageID #: 17

remain in the group and, upon information and belief, the other student was not asked to
leave the group. For some reason, Defendants made the decision to keep both students in
the same social skills group (which had been staffed with one teacher) and staff it with an
additional teacher.
69. R.N. continued to be bullied at school. Her anxiety and depression worsened and her
suicidal thoughts persisted.
70. On or about May 2, 2018, R.N. heard two students on the bus talking about a video game
character and saying, “If the character was stupid, they would name it ‘Autism’ because
people with Autism are stupid” and then they laughed. The parent emailed employees of
Defendants asking them to look into it.
71. That same day, R.N. posted comments on Facebook which included: “I’m so sick and
tired of people making fun of somebody because they are autistic….I have to deal with
this situation almost every day at school. I’m tired of being made fun of. SERIOUSLY. I
wish I was accepted for who I am.”
72. On or about May 4, 2018, R.N. broke a mirror and cut herself on the arm, prompting her
parents to take her to the Community Hospital behavioral unit where she presented with
self-inflicted cuts on her forearm, complaints of depression and anxiety leading to
suicidal thoughts and self-harming behavior. At the hospital, she told staff that she
wanted to “cut [herself] and bleed out” and was admitted as an inpatient.
73. R.N. gave a history of three prior suicide attempts and her complaints of being bullied at
school are documented in her chart: “Pt states that the catalyst for her recent thoughts was
being bullied at school.” A nurse wrote a notation that R.N. “perseverates over a boy who
bullies her for being autistic.”

17

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 18 of 26 PageID #: 18

74. R.N. said that she wanted to hurt the person at school who bullies her because of her
autism. Her discharge diagnoses were Major Depressive Disorder and an unspecified
anxiety disorder.
75. The ongoing bullying which R.N. experienced at school and on the bus was so pervasive
and severe that it created a hostile and unsafe environment and instilled in R.N. a fear of
going to school.
76. R.N. has the right to attend school in an environment free from hostility towards persons
with disabilities and the hostile environment which she experienced at Defendants’
school(s) deprived her of educational opportunities and benefits.
77. The bullying was more than isolated or sporadic incidents; it was serious, ongoing and
continuous and had the systemic effect of denying R.N. to educational programs and
activities.
78. The parents had several meetings with school administrators and staff at which they
expressed their concerns about R.N. being bullied. Defendants’ employees dismissed the
parents’ concerns because, according to them, the complained of conduct did not meet
the definition of bullying under Indiana law. According to the Principal, “because it
wasn’t repeated, it wasn’t bullying.”
79. When the parents complained to school employees about the bullying, the staff refused to
take them seriously. Instead of taking reasonable measures to address the parents’
legitimate concerns about the bullying which R.N. was being forced to endure at school,
school administrators and staff attributed it to her “overreacting.”

18

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 19 of 26 PageID #: 19

80. Despite numerous reports that R.N. was being bullied (made by R.N. and her parents),
Defendants failed to conduct appropriate investigations into any of the reported incidents
and disregarded or discounted R.N.’s version of events.
81. Defendants had actual knowledge that harassment of R.N. based on her disability was so
severe and pervasive that it created a hostile environment that deprived R.N. of access to
their educational programs, activities and opportunities.
82. When the parents met with school employees on or about 5/14/18 to discuss ways to
address the challenges which R.N. was experiencing at school, Defendants suggested that
R.N. attend school half days or go on homebound.
83. Defendants’ deliberate indifference to the harassment of R.N. was demonstrated by its
actions (and inaction), which were clearly unreasonable in light of the known
circumstances.
84. On or about January 22, 2019, an article was published in the Daily Journal reporting
that a mental health survey of students enrolled in Defendants’ district revealed that over
80% of respondents saw stress or anxiety and over 73% reported depression.
http://www.dailyjournal.net/2019/01/22/mental-health-survey-reveals-studentsneeds/#.XEd-Ym2Hrvc.facebook
85. In that article, a representative of Defendants reported an increase in reports of students
having suicidal ideation and three student suicides in the last two years.
86. The Board’s president is quoted as saying, “Until tonight I never thought about what we
are doing and where are our gaps. It’s a huge unmet need.”

19

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 20 of 26 PageID #: 20

87. The District’s Superintendent reportedly said that teachers who work for the district
either lack the necessary training to deal with these issues or do not know where to direct
students for help.
COUNT I
SECTION 504 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT
88. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference their prior allegations as if fully set forth herein.
89. This claim is brought pursuant to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29
U.S.C. § 794 et seq. (“Section 504”) and its implementing regulations, 34 C.F.R. § 104 et
seq.
90. Section 504 guarantees R.N. the right to participate, along with nondisabled students, in
academic, nonacademic and extracurricular activities (e.g., lunch, recess, recreational
activities) and services to the maximum extent appropriate to her needs. 34 C.F.R. §
104.34(a), (b).
91. R.N.’s condition substantially limits one or more major life activities. She is an
“individual with a disability” as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 705.
92. Defendants receive federal financial assistance.
93. Defendants operate a “program or activity” as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 794(b); namely,
provision of educational services.
94. Defendants operated their program or activity on the basis of generalizations,
assumptions, prejudices or stereotypes about R.N.’s disability and how it affects her.
95. Students’ bullying of R.N. constitutes harassment on the basis of her disability, which
interfered with her right to receive an education in an environment free from
discrimination.

20

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 21 of 26 PageID #: 21

96. Defendants knew, or were deliberately indifferent to knowing, that R.N. was being
harassed on the basis of her disability, yet failed to take proper steps to investigate or
otherwise determine what occurred.
97. Defendants knew, or were deliberately indifferent to knowing, that R.N. was being
subjected to discriminatory harassment which created a hostile environment sufficiently
serious to interfere with or limit R.N.’s ability to participate in or benefit from
Defendants’ programs or activities; namely, their educational program.
98. Despite this knowledge, Defendants failed to take prompt and effective steps to end the
harassment, eliminate the hostile environment, prevent its recurrence and remedy its
effects.
99. Defendants discriminated against R.N. solely by reason of her disability in violation of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq. Specifically,
Defendants subjected her to a hostile educational environment and deprived her of the
opportunity to attend school and participate in their programs or activities.
100. Defendants excluded R.N. from participation in, denied her the benefits of, or otherwise
subjected her to discrimination under a program or activity which receives federal
financial assistance in violation of 34 C.F.R. § 104(a).
101. By allowing a hostile educational environment to exist at school, Defendants
discriminated against R.N. because of her disability.
102. Defendants acted with discriminatory intent or deliberate indifference towards R.N.
103. Non-disabled persons receive the benefits or services for which R.N. is otherwise
qualified, but R.N., solely by reason of her disability, was excluded from, denied

21

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 22 of 26 PageID #: 22

participation in or denied the benefits of attending school by Defendants or was otherwise
subjected to discrimination by Defendants.
COUNT II
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
104. Plaintiffs incorporate their prior allegations as if fully set forth herein.
105. This claim is brought pursuant to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42
U.S.C. § 12132 and its implementing regulations, 34 C.F.R. Part 35.
106. Defendants are “public entities” as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 12131(1).
107. R.N. is a “qualified individual with a disability” as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 12131(2).
108. By reason of R.N.’s disability, Defendants excluded her from participation in or denied
her the benefits of the services, programs or activities of a public entity or subjected R.N.
to discrimination. Specifically, by failing to take reasonable measures to address the
bullying, Defendants subjected R.N. to a hostile environment at school.
109. Defendants acted with discriminatory intent or deliberate indifference towards R.N.
110. Defendants’ actions (and inaction) violate Title II of the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 12132 et seq. (“ADA”).
COUNT III
EQUAL PROTECTION
111. Plaintiffs incorporate their prior allegations as if fully set forth herein.
112. R.N. belongs to a protected class by reason of her disability. She is entitled to attend
school in an environment which is not hostile; however, she was repeatedly harassed by
other students, in whole or in part, because of her disability. This harassment created a

22

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 23 of 26 PageID #: 23

hostile environment at school and deprived R.N. of educational opportunities and
benefits.
113. Defendants knew or should have known that failing to take reasonable measures to
prevent R.N. from being subjected to harassment violated her equal protection rights.
114. Defendants had actual knowledge that R.N. was being bullied but turned a blind eye and
their failure to act in the face of such knowledge demonstrates their deliberate
indifference toward R.N.’s predicament.
115. Defendants’ inaction and failure to take meaningful steps to address student on student
harassment in their schools represents a widespread custom or practice that has been
going on for years.
116. There is no rational basis or legitimate state interest to justify Defendants’ inaction in
the face of numerous reports that R.N. was being bullied.
117. By their custom or practice of ignoring the bullying and as a result of their inaction,
Defendants subjected R.N. to multiple instances of discrimination because of her
disability.
118. Defendants’ custom or practice of ignoring the harassment of students (particularly
disabled students) in their schools is so well-settled that it amounts to a policy which is
unconstitutional. As a result of their unconstitutional custom or practice, R.N.’s
constitutional rights were violated.
119. Pursuant to their custom, practice or de facto policy of ignoring student on student
harassment, Defendants subjected R.N. to multiple instances of discrimination because of
her disability.

23

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 24 of 26 PageID #: 24

120. Whether Defendants adopted a policy or engaged in a custom or practice which amounts
to a policy, its inaction in the face of the ongoing, repeated and severe harassment of R.N.
lacks any rational relationship with a legitimate government interest.
121. Defendants’ custom, policy or practice does not apply to students without disabilities.
122. Defendants acted with discriminatory intent or deliberate indifference towards R.N.
123. Nondisabled students were not subjected to the same treatment as R.N.
124. Defendants, acting under color of state law, discriminated against R.N. because of her
disability by allowing a hostile environment to exist at school. Such discrimination
deprived R.N. of the equal protection of the law in violation of the Fourteenth
Amendment to the Constitution.
COUNT IV
NEGLIGENCE AND NEGLIGENCE PER SE
125. Plaintiffs incorporate their prior allegations as if fully set forth herein.
126. At all relevant times, R.N. was lawfully upon the premises of Defendants’ school or
school bus.
127. Defendants owed R.N. common law and statutory duties of reasonable care and
supervision of students attending the school and riding the school bus, including R.N.
128. Defendants owed R.N. a duty to protect her from the reasonably foreseeable actions of
others.
129. Defendants breached these duties as more particularly described below.
130. There is a history of student-on-student bullying at schools operated by Defendants,
including the school(s) which R.N. attended.

24

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 25 of 26 PageID #: 25

131. Defendants knew or should have known the nature and extent of the bullying which was
occurring in their schools.
132. Defendants failed to take reasonable measures to prevent R.N. from being subjected to
bullying when she was at school, school-sponsored activities or on the school bus. This
failure directly and proximately increased the risk of harm to R.N. and includes failing
supervise students in their charge; failing to devise, implement and enforce an
appropriate anti-bullying policy and procedures; failing to intervene when students are
bullied; failing to properly investigate reports of bullying; and failing to take appropriate
disciplinary action against the perpetrators.
133. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ negligence, Plaintiffs have sustained
damages, specifically pain and suffering. Specifically, R.N. suffered physical injuries and
emotional distress and R.T. incurred medical expenses on behalf of R.N. as a result.
134. Defendants knew or should have known that R.N. was being subjected to harassment
and bullying by other students at school. The students who harassed R.N. were subject to
Defendants’ disciplinary authority.
135. Defendants’ negligence, failure to investigate the harassment of R.N. and failure to take
disciplinary action against the perpetrators created a hostile environment at school, made
R.N. more vulnerable to harassment at school and/or caused R.N. to be subjected to
harassment.
136. To the extent Defendants violated federal and state statutes and such statutory violations
proximately caused or contributed to harm R.N., Defendants are liable for negligence per
se.

25

 Case 1:19-cv-01922-TWP-MJD Document 1 Filed 05/13/19 Page 26 of 26 PageID #: 26

137. Defendants’ negligent acts or omissions caused R.N. personal injury and emotional
distress.
RELIEF REQUESTED
Plaintiffs request the following relief:
138. Judgment in their favor and against Defendants, jointly and severally;
139. Compensatory damages;
140. Reasonable attorney fees pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 794a(b), 42 U.S.C. § 12205 and 42
U.S.C. § 1988(b);
141. Costs of this action; and
142. All other relief reasonable in the premises.
Respectfully submitted,

/S/ Thomas W. Blessing 15696-49
MASSILLAMANY JETER & CARSON
11650 Lantern Rd., Suite 204
Fishers IN 46038
317.576.8580
317.203.1012 fax
tom@mjcattorneys.com

26