109 F. Supp. 3d 1060
S.D. Iowa2015Background
- KR.S. was a 16-year-old ninth-grader with ADHD and written-language challenges under an IEP.
- K.R.S. experienced ongoing peer harassment and name-calling prior to and during ninth grade.
- In fall 2012, K.R.S. joined the football team; several players allegedly threw footballs at his head during practices.
- Nurse Schuelke and school staff became aware of headaches and visual symptoms later linked to a cavernous malformation; K.R.S. underwent emergency evaluation and surgery.
- The school conducted investigations after the October 2012 hospitalization, but evidence shows disputed timing and awareness of harassment before the head injury.
- Parties narrowed the case through stipulations: Division IV §504 claim remained against the District and Nurse Schuelke; divisions VI–X were dismissed without prejudice for several defendants; §1983 claim withdrawn.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the §504 claim survives summary judgment. | KR.S. alleges disability-based harassment with a sufficiently severe/pervasive impact. | District asserts lack of knowledge and failure to show deliberate indifference. | Disputed factual issues preclude summary judgment on §504. |
| Whether the District or Nurse Schuelke owed a fiduciary duty to KR.S. | Plaintiff argues a fiduciary duty to provide a safe learning environment exists. | Iowa law does not recognize such a duty in this setting. | Summary judgment for defendants on fiduciary duty claim. |
| Whether the conduct constitutes intentional infliction of emotional distress. | Harassment over a year and the head injury could be outrageous conduct. | No evidence of severe emotional distress; conduct not sufficiently outrageous. | Disturbing conduct disputed; IIED claim dismissed for lack of severe distress evidence. |
| Whether Iowa Code § 280.13C creates a private right of action for failure to remove from athletic competition. | Statute implies remedial purposes allowing private action. | No explicit or implicit private right; Cort factors not satisfied. | Division VIII dismissed; no private right of action under the statute. |
| Whether the negligence claims against the District and Nurse Schuelke survive. | Failure to remove from sports and alleged inadequate medical care breached duties. | Discretionary immunity and adequacy of care debated; some issues require trial. | Negligence claims survive summary judgment in part; other issues reserved for trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. Monroe County Bd. of Ed., 526 U.S. 629 (U.S. 1999) (establishes framework for student-to-student harassment claims under §504/Title IX matchup with disability context)
- Werth v. Board of Directors of the Public Schs. of the City of Milwaukee, 472 F.Supp.2d 1113 (E.D. Wis. 2007) (extends Davis/Werth framework to §504 disability harassment in schools)
- K.M. v. Hyde Park Cent. Sch. Dist., 381 F.Supp.2d 343 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (applies Davis/Werth analysis to §504 disability harassment claim)
- Biggs v. Bd. of Educ., 229 F.Supp.2d 437 (D. Md. 2002) (discusses elements of §504 disability harassment claim)
- Doe v. Galster, 768 F.3d 611 (7th Cir. 2014) (addressing admissibility and knowledge standards in harassment contexts)
- Bruning v. Carroll Comm. Sch. Dist., 486 F.Supp.2d 892 (N.D. Iowa 2007) (discusses deliberate indifference and public policy considerations in §504 context)
- Cort v. Ash, 422 U.S. 66 (U.S. 1975) (Cort test for private rights of action in statutory claims)
- Shumate v. Drake Univ., 846 N.W.2d 503 (Iowa 2014) (factors for implied private rights in Iowa statutes)