PITTSBURGH – A father who was banned from attending all school events by the Jefferson-Morgan School District due to alleged bullying, physical aggression and use of profanity and claimed he was defamed by the District, has settled his claims.
Virgil McNett of Mather filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on Aug. 20 versus Jefferson-Morgan School District, of Jefferson.
McNett, who lives in the defendant school district, has several children who attend school within it, including a son who plays on a high school football team, according to his complaint.
The plaintiff claimed that on Sept. 18, 2020, while picking his son up from a game, he “calmly” asked his son’s then-high school football coach to resign from his position.
In contrast, the coach, Aaron Giorgi, testified that, as soon as McNett’s son had left the field, the plaintiff approached the fence behind the bench area where the coaches and players were located and began yelling at him.
Giorgi testified that McNett, in the proximity of student athletes and the coaching staff, stated that the plaintiff would climb over the fence to fight Giorgi, and that McNett further stated that he would “kick Giorgi’s a–s.”
McNett claimed that several days later, he received a letter from the school district banning him from school grounds or any school sponsored event due to “bullying, intimidation, physical or verbal aggression” and use of profanity.
He alleged that despite repeated attempts to “rectify” the situation, the school board has failed to allow him to tell his side of the story or reconsider his suspension.
McNett added the school district’s allegations are false and that they are attempting to damage his reputation and defame his character by banning his access to school events.
McNett further alleged the defendant’s actions have caused him to miss his son’s senior football season and have prevented him from coaching, and among other demands, sought a preliminary injunction lifting the ban imposed by the defendant, pending the result of a trial in this matter
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania Judge Robert J. Colville denied McNett’s motion for the injunction in a Nov. 23 memorandum opinion, finding Giorgi’s testimony to be “highly credible.”
“The evidence before Court tends to establish that plaintiff, despite his assertions to the contrary, was neither calm nor stationary during the Sept. 18, 2020 incident, and his behavior could certainly be described as disruptive and aggressive, considering the nature of his statements and the manner in which he made such statements, including his pacing around school buses to locate Mr. Giorgi, as well as the fact that he made such statements on school district grounds with students present,” Colville said.
“The Court also notes that, while the Sept. 18, 2020 incident clearly involved plaintiff’s dissatisfaction with the performance of the football team, it did not occur during a game or at a stadium, where excitement and raised voices may be anticipated. The event occurred as the football team returned to defendant’s high school parking lot from an away football game, and parents were present at the parking lot simply to retrieve student athletes.”
Jefferson-Morgan School District then filed a motion to dismiss McNett’s suit on Dec. 14, for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The District cited precedent in Cole v. Montague Board of Education in making its case.
In that case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld a District Court’s dismissal of a complaint by two parents, where the plaintiffs alleged that their due process rights were violated when they were “illegally banned” from school property, as “the contention is plainly lacking merit.”
“Both Courts of Appeal and District Courts within the United States Courts of Appeal for the Third Circuit have found that a school district does not violate the constitutional rights of a parent who is banned from school property. Likewise, plaintiff in the instant case has no claim of violations of federal rights by his alleged ban from school property. Thus, plaintiff will be unable to establish that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiff’s claims. For this reason alone, plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction should be denied,” per the dismissal motion.
“School Districts in Pennsylvania are immune from suit in a cause of action sounding in defamation. Under the Judicial Code, a school district is defined as a local agency for purposes of governmental immunity. Where a plaintiff has averred willful misconduct on the part of local agency employees, Section 8542(a)(2) of the Judicial Code, bars recovery from the local agency because liability may be imposed on the local agency only for negligent acts. Furthermore, an action in defamation falls within none of the eight enumerated exceptions to local agency immunity set forth in Section 8542(b). Moreover, Section 8550, 42 Pa.C.S. Section 8550, does not create an exception to Section 8542 and as a result, does not permit the imposition of liability on a local agency for the willful misconduct of its employees.”
UPDATE
On March 4, it was reported that the parties had jointly settled the litigation. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.
“The parties to this action, acting through counsel, and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) hereby stipulate, in consideration of a negotiated settlement executed by them, to the dismissal with prejudice of this action, including all claims stated herein against the defendant, with each party to bear its own attorney’s fees and costs,” the stipulation stated.
Colville granted the dismissal the same day.
For counts of civil rights violations under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and defamation per se, the plaintiff was seeking general and specific compensatory damages against the defendant, Jefferson-Morgan School District, in the amount proven at trial for the defamation of plaintiff’s character, an injunction ordering the defendant to discontinue the violation of plaintiff’s constitutional rights, specific compensatory damages in the amount of attorneys’ fees and court costs,; punitive damages and all other relief that the Court may deem just and proper.
The plaintiff was represented by Anthony J. Werner of Very Law, in Pittsburgh.
The defendant was represented by Joseph W. Cavrich of Andrews & Price, also in Pittsburgh.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:21-cv-01064
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com