Dennis v. Board of Education, 21 F. Supp. 3d 497

Dennis and Edsall, Easton High students and lacrosse team members, were suspended for possessing weapons on school property after a bus search following a suspected alcohol incident.
Duncan authorized the search of the lacrosse team bus on April 13, 2011; Assistant Principal Bowen instructed Dennis to retrieve a pocketknife.
Dennis admitted to possessing a pocketknife; bag searches revealed a Leatherman with small blades for him and a butane lighter for Edsall.
Police arrested Dennis at the scene; suspensions were affirmed by the Principal, Superintendent Salmon, and the Board.
State Board of Education reversed the suspensions and expunged the records on April 10, 2012; Dennis and Edsall filed this § 1983 action a year and a half later, asserting Fourth Amendment and Maryland Article 26 claims and Fourteenth Amendment and Maryland Article 24 claims; Defendants moved to dismiss.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the § 1983 claims against the Board and officials in official capacities are cognizable.	Dennis/Edsall argue against dismissal.	Board/officials are not “persons” under § 1983 in official capacities.	Dismissed as to Counts I against Board and officials in official capacities.
Whether individual Defendants have immunity under the Coverdell Act for constitutional claims.	Coverdell Act immunity applies to all claims.	Act provides limited immunity for certain tort-like claims.	Coverdell Act immunity does not apply to federal/state constitutional claims; claims survive.
Whether the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the Fourth Amendment/Article 26 claims.	Search violated Fourth Amendment rights; qualified immunity not met.	Defendants acted within discretion and qualified immunity should apply.	Qualified immunity denied for Fourth Amendment/Article 26; claims survive against individually named Defendants.
Whether the Fourteenth Amendment/ Maryland Article 24 procedural due process claims survive.	Due process was violated by notice/discipline.	Procedural due process satisfied; claims fail on immunity.	Dismissed as to Fourteenth Amendment/Article 24 claims with qualified immunity.

New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (U.S. 1985) (school searches require reasonable suspicion in many contexts; narrow exception for withstanding privacy interest)
Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (U.S. 1975) (education as a property interest; due process requires notice and opportunity to be heard)
Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (U.S. 2001) (two-step qualified immunity inquiry; later clarified by Pearson)
Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (U.S. 2009) (flexibility in order of the two qualified-immunity steps)
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (U.S. 1982) (establishes qualified immunity doctrine)
Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (U.S. 1989) (state officials not “persons” under § 1983 in some contexts)
Bethel Sch. Dist. No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (U.S. 1986) (school disciplinary rules need not be as detailed as criminal code)
Ratner v. Loudoun Cnty. Pub. Sch., 16 F. App’x 140 (4th Cir. 2001) (due process standards in school suspension context)