PITTSBURGH – A 14-year-old African American and special needs student at Ambridge High School, who claimed he was kicked off the football team for participating in an angry exchange with a teammate who had bullied him on Snapchat, has settled with the school district.
A.F. (a minor, by and through his father, Antonio Fultz) first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on Aug. 6 versus Ambridge Area School District. All parties are of Ambridge.
“A.F. joined the high school football team in April of 2021. A.F. played the position of starting defensive tackle. A.F. has participated in summer practices without pads in anticipation of playing football during the 2021-22 season,” the suit said.
“On June 23, 2021, A.F. was communicating with his weightlifting coaches, Xiyrail Barnat and Keith Olden in the Snapchat group via text messages. They were concerned A.F. was not going to weightlifting. An older Caucasian teammate, a sophomore, intervened in the communications. The teammate, who was also competing for the defensive tackle position held by A.F., sent voice messages to A.F. calling him a 'lazy bum' and swearing at him.”
The suit alleged A.F. had a history with this sophomore student, competing with him athletically since seventh grade and having been the victim of an assault from him and his cousin back in 2018.
“A.F. recently beat the teammate for the starting defensive tackle position and believed he was being bullied again by this teammate. A.F. and the teammate began to insult each other, A.F. by texts and the teammate by voice messages. The argument escalated when the teammate told A.F., ‘You want to fight? I will kill you.’ Similar threats were then exchanged by A.F. in text and the teammate by voice message. A.F. sent an older picture he had in his phone of him holding a BB gun with the barrel pointed away and over his shoulder. A.F. sent no threat attached to the picture,” per the suit.
“The argument stopped between A.F. and the teammate soon after the picture was sent. The argument was observed by coaches, Olden and Barnat, who remained logged on the app. Olden has provided A.F. with a subsequent written statement that reads, ‘Nothing wasn’t said that doesn’t get said everyday between kids.’ Barnat has provided A.F. with a subsequent written statement that reads, ‘In the Snapchat messages there was a back-and-forth argument between’ A.F. and the teammate.”
As a result of two subsequent school meetings, a police investigation and a letter sent from the District to A.F., it was learned that no criminal charges would be filed against him – but that he was being kicked off the football team for the 2021-2022 School Year, and the other student involved in the online altercation would not be disciplined.
The plaintiff felt that this disparate treatment is based on his race, and is therefore discriminatory.
Though counsel for the plaintiff informed the District of the recent decision reached by the U.S. Supreme Court in Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L., when it found that school system violated a student’s rights by kicking her off the cheerleading team for a remark she made on Snapchat, the District did not reverse its decision to remove A.F. from his school’s football team.
Additionally, the suit stated that on Aug. 1, the sophomore teammate at issue posted an unsettling picture of his face in the dark on Snapchat with the comment, “Anyone else have the urge to kill someone u hate at night.”
Fultz advised the school of the post.
On Dec. 17 and in response to the District’s prior motion to dismiss his constitutional rights claims, the plaintiff opted to voluntarily dismiss Counts I-III himself – but retained the civil rights count of racial discrimination.
Ambridge Area School District answered the complaint on Jan. 10, arguing that team coaches participated in the Snapchat group in question and witnessed A.F.’s angry messages to his teammate, in addition to providing 13 separate affirmative defenses.
“The claims asserted in plaintiff’s complaint are barred by applicable statutes of limitations. At all times relevant hereto, the District acted reasonably and consistently with any and all duties and obligations imposed upon it by law or otherwise while engaged in the performance of its duties. The actions of the District do not rise to the level of a constitutional violation. The District asserts herein all defenses available to it under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, including but not limited to, qualified immunity. If plaintiff suffered any injuries or damages, plaintiff failed to properly mitigate their alleged damages. Plaintiff’s claims are or may be barred in whole or in part by the doctrines of estoppel, waiver and/or unclean hands,” per those defenses, in part.
UPDATE
The plaintiff filed an unopposed petition for settlement approval on March 21, explaining that the parties had reached an agreement.
“The parties have reached a settlement as follows:
• Plaintiff is eligible to compete to return to the Ambridge High School Football Team for the 2022-2023 season, subject to any and all eligibility/qualification requirements which are applicable to any other student of the Ambridge Area School District;
• Defendant has agreed to pay the sum of $1,000 to plaintiff, via his father (subject to final approval of the settlement by a vote of a majority of Directors of the Ambridge Area School District School Board), in exchange for plaintiffs’ execution of a full and final settlement agreement and release, and plaintiff’s filing of a stipulation for discontinuance with prejudice;
• Defendant agrees to pay plaintiff’s counsel the federal court filing fee of $400;
The parties wish to avoid new litigation costs. This petition is unopposed. It is agreed that this settlement is in the best interest of the parties.”
The following day, March 22, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania Judge William S. Stickman IV ordered that the settlement was approved and the case was closed.
The plaintiff was represented by Erik M. Yurkovich in Wexford.
The defendant was represented by Joseph W. Cavrich and Salvatore Bittner of Andrews & Price, in Pittsburgh.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:21-cv-01051
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com