K. S. v. Northwest Independent School District
689 F. App'x 780
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- K.S., a sixth-grade student, reported repeated name-calling and occasional chest-grabbing and other physical contact by peers while at Tidwell Middle School during Fall 2010; some incidents occurred on the bus, in hallways, and in the PE locker room.
- School officials were informed early in the semester; the District investigated multiple incidents, sometimes disciplined other students, and sometimes disciplined K.S. for his own misconduct or role in altercations.
- In October and December 2010 the school received letters from K.S.’s attorney, counselor, and doctor describing bullying-related depression; those later letters did not characterize the conduct as sex-based harassment.
- K.S. withdrew from the school in January 2011 after the District began additional protective measures (psychological evaluation, monitoring, escorts, seating on the bus).
- K.S. sued under Title IX alleging student-on-student sex-based harassment; the magistrate judge recommended summary judgment for the District on the grounds that K.S. failed to show (1) denial of access to educational opportunities and (2) deliberate indifference; the district court adopted the recommendation and this appeal follows.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether District was deliberately indifferent to known sex-based peer harassment | District's responses were ineffective and the District failed to follow its own policies and OCR guidance, showing deliberate indifference | District investigated and took disciplinary or corrective action on reported incidents; responses were not clearly unreasonable | No plain error in finding no genuine dispute that the District was not deliberately indifferent |
| Whether harassment was so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive to bar access to educational opportunities | K.S. says repeated name-calling, touching, absences, and depression deprived him of access | District disputes severity/causal link and notes interventions and lack of evidence tying many absences to sex-based harassment | District court resolved against K.S.; this court affirmed (analysis focused on deliberate indifference) |
| Whether failure to follow school policies or OCR guidelines establishes Title IX deliberate indifference | Violations of policies/guidelines demonstrate indifference | Failure to follow administrative procedures does not itself create Title IX liability | Court held such procedural failures do not establish deliberate indifference under controlling precedent |
| Whether generalized, self-serving declarations and inconsistent testimony create fact issues | K.S. relied on his declarations describing frequent reporting and harassment | Defendant pointed to deposition contradictions and lack of particulars for many claimed reports | Court found contradictions and vague assertions insufficient to create genuine factual dispute |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, 526 U.S. 629 (1999) (establishes Title IX standards for student-on-student sexual harassment and deliberate indifference standard)
- Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District, 524 U.S. 274 (1998) (failure to follow administrative/regulatory procedures alone does not establish Title IX damages liability)
- Fennell v. Marion Independent School District, 804 F.3d 398 (5th Cir. 2015) (responses to harassment that include some investigative or disciplinary action may defeat a deliberate indifference claim)
- Sanches v. Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District, 647 F.3d 156 (5th Cir. 2011) (deliberate indifference requires a clearly unreasonable response; negligence insufficient)
- Doe ex rel. Doe v. Dallas Independent School District, 220 F.3d 380 (5th Cir. 2000) (school responses need not be perfect; requirement is not flawless investigations)
- Doe v. Galster, 768 F.3d 611 (7th Cir. 2014) (courts should defer to school administrators unless response is clearly unreasonable)