MONTGOMERY BLAIR SIBLEY v. ST. ALBANS SCHOOL
134 A.3d 789
| D.C. | 2016Background
- Appellant Montgomery Blair Sibley enrolled his son A.B.S. as a National Cathedral Boy Chorister in 2008; chorister participation required enrollment at St. Albans School and a multi‑year commitment.
- Stipend for choristers and financial aid covered part of tuition; disputes arose when the chorister stipend was reduced for 2009–10 and a tuition balance remained unpaid.
- St. Albans conditioned re‑enrollment for 2010–11 on payment; the school allowed A.B.S. to finish 2009–10 after a $2,000 payment but later declined re‑enrollment when extended deadlines were not met.
- Sibley sued St. Albans, the National Cathedral, and PECF seeking declaratory relief and damages for misrepresentation, breach, and related claims; appellees counterclaimed for unpaid 2009–10 tuition and attorney’s fees.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for defendants on Sibley’s claims, granted the counterclaim for unpaid tuition plus attorney’s fees, and denied Sibley leave to amend to add negligent‑infliction claims and certain discovery requests. Sibley appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of leave to amend to add negligent infliction of emotional distress | Hedgepeth opened a new theory; amendment should be allowed | Proposed amendment failed to allege requisite duty, risk, or serious distress; contract bars consequential damages | Denial affirmed — amendment lacked merit under Hedgepeth elements and contract terms |
| Discovery compulsion for other students’ financial aid files | Records would show disparate treatment of choristers and prove misrepresentations | Records irrelevant and unduly burdensome; school’s affidavit shows stipend considered like other tuition sources | Denial affirmed — low probative value and burdens outweighed relevance |
| Misrepresentation and promissory claims about chorister stipend and financial aid | Sibley relied on statements/website promising a 45% stipend and that stipend wouldn’t affect aid, inducing multi‑year commitment | Statements were aspirational/qualified (hope/likely); no particularized, reliable proof; stipend was properly considered in aid | Summary judgment affirmed — no clear, convincing evidence of actionable fraud or enforceable promise |
| Counterclaim for unpaid tuition and award of attorney’s fees | $2,000 payment was represented to satisfy balance; fees limited to collection only | Contract allowed recovery of fees for necessary litigation; $2,000 did not satisfy balance; appellant precipitated suits | Counterclaim and fees affirmed — sham‑affidavit doctrine applied to contradicting affidavit; fee award justified under contract factors |
Key Cases Cited
- Hedgepeth v. Whitman Walker Clinic, 22 A.3d 789 (D.C. 2011) (elements for negligent infliction of emotional distress outside the zone‑of‑danger framework)
- Mixon v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth., 959 A.2d 55 (D.C. 2008) (summary judgment constitutionality and jury role explained)
- Taylor v. D.C. Water & Sewer Auth., 957 A.2d 45 (D.C. 2008) (standard of review for denial of leave to amend)
- Sartor v. Arkansas Nat. Gas Corp., 321 U.S. 620 (1944) (Supreme Court recognition of summary judgment procedure)
- Bennett v. Kiggins, 377 A.2d 57 (D.C. 1977) (elements and pleading particularity required for fraud claims)
- Kudon v. f.m.e. Corp., 547 A.2d 976 (D.C. 1988) (factors for awarding attorneys’ fees under contract for collection and related defense)