Education – Abuse – School bus aide

Where plaintiff parents have alleged that the public school defendants created a dangerous environment in which the plaintiffs’ 7-year-old child, who is autistic and emotionally impaired, was repeatedly physically and verbally abused by a school bus aide, a motion to dismiss the complaint should be allowed in part and denied in part.

“Plaintiff Jaime Nelson-Molnar (Nelson) filed this action individually and as next friend of her son J.W. against defendants Ann Arbor Public Schools (AAPS or the District), Michael Johnson, and Durham School Services LP, d/b/a Durham Transportation (Durham). Plaintiffs allege defendants created a dangerous environment in which J.W., Nelson’s seven-year-old child who is autistic and emotionally impaired, was repeatedly physically and verbally abused by a school bus aide. The matter is before the Court on AAPS’s motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim against the District for violating plaintiffs’ due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment (Count II), discrimination in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Count IV) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Count V), disability discrimination under Michigan’s Persons with Disabilities Civil Rights Act (Count VI), failure to report child abuse under Michigan Child Protection Law (Count VII), and intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count VIII).

“Upon a careful review of the written submissions, the Court deems it appropriate to render its decision without a hearing pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(f)(2). For the reasons set forth below, defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part.

“For the reasons set forth above, defendant AAPS’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 21) is GRANTED as to Counts Two (state-created danger, Monell), Seven (failure to report child abuse), and Eight (intentional infliction of emotional distress) and DENIED as to Counts Four (discrimination in violation of ADA), Five (discrimination in violation of Rehabilitation Act), and Six (discrimination in violation of PWDCRA).”

Nelson-Molnar v. Ann Arbor Pub. Sch.; MiLW 02-107985 , 29 pages; U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan; Caram Steeh, J.

Click here to read the full opinion

Copyright © 2024 BridgeTower Media. All Rights Reserved.