Case Document 1 Filed 06/13/19 Page 1 of 6

And E. Castro

ov1s California

Plaintiff in Pro Se



Pl   

EASTLES

   

JUN 13191.3

coum
?'o?fssr DIST CALIFORNIA

ogpln?tE?h

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
FRESNO DIVISION

ANDY E. CASTRO,

Plaintiff,

 

 

Case No.; Ono?$1

CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT
FOR VIOLATIONS OF 

(1) 1St Amendment Freedom of

V. Speech;
2 5th Amendment Due Process;

3 CA Constitution Art. I 2; 
CITY OF 4 CA Ed. Code 48950(a)
UNIFIED SCHOOL DI 
STEPHANIE HANKS ANDREW REQUESTING GENERAL AND
BOLLS, Individually and as PUNITIVE DAMAGES
Emplo ees of C1 of CloV1s and/or 
Clov1s ni?ed So 001 D1str1ct, [42 U.S.C. 1983 Anc11., Jurls.]

Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

INTRODUCTION

This is an action against the City of Clovis, State of California, Clovis Uni?ed

School District and two of its employees who under color of state law infringed and
violated Plaintiff 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech, 5th Amendment right
to due process of law, California Constitution, Art. I, 2, and California Ed. Code
48950(a). Plaintiff seeks general and punitive damages inthe sum of $10,000,000

against each named defendant jointly or severally.

 

 

 



-lCase Document 1' Filed 06/13/19 Page 2 of 6

JURISDICTION

1. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 because the

matter arises under the United States Constitution and its laws.
VENUE ..

2. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2) because the

events or omissions giving rise to this claim occurred in this district.
PARTIES

3. Plaintiff Andy E. Castro (Castro) is a natural adult person resident of this
judicial district.

4. Defendant City of Clovis (Clovis) is an incorporated city in the County of
Fresno, California. 1

5. Defendant Clovis Uni?ed School District (CUSD) is an elementary to
high school entity of Clovis.

6. Defendant Stephanie Hanks is a natural adult person resident of this judi-
cial district.

7. Defendant Andrew Bolls is a natural adult person resident of this judicial
district. 

FACTS

8. On May 30, 2019 Plaintiff, a Clovis High School (Clovis High) top-20
honor roll student with scholarships and an excellence engineering award, was
scheduled to participate in the 2019 graduation ceremony at Clovis High. Because
of his already earned and vested scholastic performance, Clovis High had granted
him an irrevocable 4-seat graduation VIP sitting reservation. On May 14, 2019
Plaintiff had turned 18 and on May 22, 2019 had successfully completed all of his
high school education with a cumulative 3.67 GPA. Excited about his graduation
Plaintiff twitted his long-term Nigerian friend using the words ?nigga? and ?nigger?
as he would ?bro? as any other teenage-used and common word used as a Sign of

sincere ?iendship and thus acceptable intercultural communication. A twitter user

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 






 

 

Case Document 1 Filed 06/13/19 Page 3 of 6

of their account found those words offensive and reported them to defendants who
immediately, without any meaning?il notice, opportunity to defend, or legal defense
process arbitrarily and capriciously punished him by denying his right to participate
in his graduation ceremony, ordering him to delete the alleged o??ensive message
?'Ol?l?l his twitter account, revoking his VIP sitting privilege in the graduation
ceremony, removing him off the school premises, and enjoining him from
participating in his long-awaited graduation ceremony that was by then only 3 hours
away. Because May 30, 2019 was his graduation date and thus the last day Plaintiff
would have any school activities at Clovis High, Defendants, acting under color of
law, by their conduct in fact expelled Plainti?? from Clovis High School forever

ruining his and economic future.

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

First Claim for Relief
(First Amendment Violation)

9. Castro incorporates by reference 1-8 of this complaint as though fully
set forth herein. 

10. Defendants intentionally, will?illy, wrong?illy, capriciously, arbitrarily,
and in conscious disregard to Castro?s right to freedom of speech censored and
punished him for exercising his First Amendment right to person-to-person
communicate and so associate with his personal Nigerian ?iend who consented to
Plainti?" intercultural communication.

11. By said conduct defendants violated Castro?s right to First-Amendment-
protected free speech and ?eedom of association so guaranteed by the United States
Constitution.

12. As a proximate consequenCe thereof Castro has been injured, continues
to be injured, and will be permanently harmed.

13. Defendants? conduct, as plead in 1i 8, above, was a substantial factor in

causing Castro?s harm.

 

 






 

Case Document 1 Filed 06/13/19 Page 4 of 6



(F 

14. Castro incorporates by reference 1? 1 3 of this complaint as though fully
set forth herein. 

l5. Defendants intentionally, will?illy, wrongfully, capriciously, arbitrarily,
and in conscious disregard to Castro?s right to due process guaranteed by the Fifth
Amendment to the United States Constitution, deprived him of his earned and thus
vested right to participate in his graduation ceremony, similarly revoked his earned
and thus vested right to VIP reservations at said ceremony, and effectively expelled
him therewith without any right to be heard administratively or judicially nor to
appeal in any forum.

16. By said conduct defendants violated Castro?s right to due process
guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution to notice and
opportunity to be heard before his rights and privileges in connection with his
excellent scholastic achievements were taken from him by defendants under color
of law.

17. As a proximate consequence thereof Castro has been injured, continues
to be injured, and will be permanently harmed.

18'. Defendants? conduct, as plead in 1] 8, above, was a substantial factor in
causing Castro?s harm.

2)

l9. Castro incorporates by reference 1le 1? 8 of this complaint as though 
set forth herein.

20. Defendants intentionally, willfully, wrongfully, capriciously, arbitrarily,
and in conscious disregard to Castro?s right to freely speak, write and publish his
sentiments on all subjects which no policy, regulation, code, or law may restrain or

abridge as guaranteed by Article I, to the California Constitution, deprived him

4

 

I I

Case Document 1 Filed 06/13/19 Page 5 of 6



of his earned and thus vested right to participate in his graduation ceremony,

 

 

2 similarly revoked his earned and thus vested right to VIP reservations at said
3 ceremony, and effectively expelled him therewith without any right to be heard
4 administratively or judicially nor to appeal in any forum.
1 5 21. By said conduct defendants violated Castro?s ?ee speech right
6 guaranteed by Article I, 2 to the California Constitution. 
7 22. As a proximate consequence thereof Castro has been injured, continues 
to be injured, and will be permanently harmed. 
9 23. Defendants? conduct, as plead in 11 8, above, was a substantial factor in
10 causing Castro?s harm.
1
.2 
13 24. Castro incorporates by reference 1?23 of this complaint as though fully
14 set forth herein.
15 25. Defendants intentionally, will?illy, wrongfully, capriciously, arbitrarily,
16 and in conscious disregard to Castro O?lcampus right to freedom of speech, made
17 and enforced a rule subjecting him to disciplinary sanctions prohibited by California
18 Education Code 48950(a) and in doing so deprived him of his earned and thus
19 vested right to participate in his graduation ceremony, similarly revoked his earned
20 and thus vested right to VIP reservations at said ceremony, and e?ectively expelled
21 him therewith without any right to be heard administratively or judicially nor to
22 appeal in any forum.
23 26. 4 By said conduct defendants violated Castro?s free speech right
24 guaranteed and prohibited by California Education Code 48950(a).
25 27. As a proximate consequence thereof Castro has been injured, continues
'26 to be injured, and will be permanently harmed. I
27 28. Defendants? conduct, as plead in {l 8, above, was a substantial factor in
28 causing Castro?s harm.

 

 

 



NM r??s?l r?I p?A r?I1?l


 

 

Case Document 1 Filed 06/13/19 Page 6 of 6

WHERETOFORE, Plaintiff prays for 
(1) General Damages in the sum of $5,000,000;
(2) Punitive damages in the sum of $5,000,000;
(3) Attomey?s fees;
(4) Costs of this suit; and,
(5) All other relief the Court deems just and proper.
June 13, 2019

y. asro,n r0 6

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury.
June 13 2019