PITTSBURGH – The mother of two minor daughters who attended a Christian academy in Western Pennsylvania has leveled charges that her children were subjected to racist and discriminatory treatment based upon their multi-racial heritage.
Gail S. (in her individual capacity and as parent and legal guardian of minor plaintiffs, Jo. S. and Je. S.) of Butler County filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on Sept. 9 versus Butler Wesleyan Academy and Butler Wesleyan Methodist Church of Butler, Allegheny Wesleyan Methodist Connection of Salem, Ohio, plus Paul Fish, Teddy Zeigler, Sally Zeigler, Dennis J. Ballock, Dave Patterson, Curt Field, Kimberly Fish and John/Jane Does, also all of Butler County.
According to the lawsuit, Jo. S. and Je. S. have both East Indian and Jewish heritage and were the only minority students at Butler Wesleyan Academy, and as such, were made to endure a racially hostile environment during their time there.
“Throughout the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 academic school years, teachers and students at defendant Academy made ethnic and racially hostile statements, slurs and/or threats to and/or about plaintiffs Jo. S. and Je. S. including, but not limited to, statements such as: “What are you?”, “Are you Black?”, “We hate you”, “We hate that you’re here”, “You don’t belong here” and “You’re black trash,” the suit says.
“Teachers, students and administrators at defendant Academy, including defendants T. Zeigler, S. Zeigler, P. Fish and/or K. Fish, on multiple occasions, also referred to plaintiffs Jo. S. and Je. S as “Black” in a way that was intended to embarrass, degrade and/or humiliate the plaintiffs for not being “White.”
The actions and treatment endured were disrespectful and unnecessary, though the suit states the school and its administrators and faculty attached such labels to the plaintiffs instead.
“Plaintiffs Jo. S. and Je. S. were described by teachers at defendant Academy as ‘disrespectful’ and/or ‘disobedient’ despite the fact that plaintiff Jo. S. and Je. S’s conduct was no different than and/or superior to the conduct of Caucasian students at defendant Academy who were not described as such. Moreover, plaintiffs Jo. S. and Je. S. were academically performing above their grade level in various subjects and above the level of their Caucasian classmates at defendant Academy,” per the suit.
“In December of 2018, plaintiffs complained of racially hostile comments that were made to plaintiffs Jo. S. and Je. S. by the son and daughter of defendants P. Fish and K Fish. Defendant P. Fish and K. Fish’s son and daughter are Caucasian students at defendant Academy. After the plaintiffs reported the racially hostile comments made to them by defendant P. Fish and K. Fish’s son and daughter, defendants T. Zeigler and S. Zeigler began to document and/or misrepresent the behavior of plaintiffs Jo. S. and Je. S.”
Meanwhile, the plaintiffs’ behavior included but was not limited to, minor issues such as not playing with other children at recess and asking a question about the school’s security cameras.
“On or about Jan. 2, 2019, plaintiff Gail S. complained to defendant P. Fish and defendant T. Zeigler that plaintiffs Jo. S. and Je. S. were being treated differently because of their race and/or ethnicity and/or in retaliation for plaintiffs’ complaints of racially hostile comments,” the suit states.
“On that same day, defendant Academy held a private board meeting where defendants Ballock and Patterson were appointed to the board without any prior notice to the parents of defendant Academy’s students, including, but not limited to, plaintiff Gail S.”
At that time, defendant Academy’s board members, including defendant P. Fish, defendant T. Zeigler, defendant S. Zeigler, defendant Ballock, defendant Field and Defendant Patterson, “indefinitely suspended” plaintiff Jo. S. and Je. S. suddenly and without prior oral or written warning, a disciplinary action that was never contemplated under the School Handbook.
Similarly-situated Caucasian students at defendant Academy, including, but not limited to defendants P. Fish and K. Fish’s son and daughter, have never been “indefinitely suspended”, even though they have engaged in worse behavior than that which could be alleged against plaintiffs Jo. S. and Je. S.
“Following plaintiffs Jo S. and Je. S’s indefinite suspension and eventual separation from defendant Academy, plaintiffs requested a refund of the unused portion of plaintiffs Jo. S. and Je. S.’s tuition,” per the lawsuit.
“Rather than provide plaintiffs with a full refund of the unused funds, defendant Academy, through its agents, including defendants T. Zeigler, S. Zeigler, P. Fish, K. Fish, Patterson, Ballock and Field, decided to provide only a partial refund and directed defendant K. Fish to keep the funds which should have rightfully been refunded to the plaintiffs.”
For counts of race discrimination, hostile educational environment, retaliation, denial of equal educational opportunity, failure to adequately train, supervise and oversee, breach of contract and unjust enrichment, the plaintiffs are seeking compensatory general damages against the defendants, and each of them, in the amount proven at trial, compensatory special damages including, but not limited to, costs of suit, reasonable attorney’s fees as permitted by law, pre- and post-judgment interest as permitted by law and such other relief, including injunctive and/or declaratory relief, as this Court may deem proper.
The plaintiffs are represented by Joel S. Sansone of the Law Offices of Joel Sansone, in Pittsburgh.
The defendants have not yet retained legal counsel.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:20-cv-01353
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com