On August 3, 2015, two minor children with disabilities filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky. The plaintiffs sued the Kenton County Sheriff's Office, the Sheriff for Kenton County (in only his official capacity), and the Sheriff's Office's School Resource Officer (in his official and individual capacities) under 42 U.S.C § 1983 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The plaintiffs, represented by the ACLU and private counsel, sought injunctive relief, declaratory relief and damages, claiming the defendant used unnecessary and excessive physical restraint and handcuffs on schoolchildren with disabilities. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants' actions constituted unreasonable seizure and excessive force in violation of plaintiffs' rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The plaintiffs also claimed that the defendants discriminated against the plaintiffs based on their disabilities and failed to accommodate their disabilities.
On September 9, 2015, the defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On September 30, 2015, the plaintiffs filed a cross motion for judgment on the pleadings.
On December 28, 2015, Judge William O. Bertelsman denied the defendants' motion to dismiss without prejudice. The Court found that the plaintiffs adequately pleaded a constitutional violation in order to make out a § 1983 claim. The plaintiffs also adequately pleaded plausible claims for discrimination under Title II.
In October 2016, both parties filed cross motions for partial summary judgment. Additionally, the defendants filed a motion to sever the claims of the two students on September 14, 2017. Judge Bertelsman denied the defendants' motion to sever because of the substantial factual similarities between the two handcuffing situations and the existence of a common question of law: whether the elbow-cuffing of these children was unconstitutional.
On October 11, 2017, Judge Bertelsman ruled on the parties' cross motions for partial summary judgment. Judge Bertelsman held for the plaintiffs on their claims of unlawful seizure and excessive use of force and municipal liability against Kenton County for those violations. The Court applied the Graham factors and found that although the severity of the crime weighed in favor of the defendants, the other factors -- whether the children posed an immediate threat to themselves or others; the age and stature of the children; and the method of handcuffing -- weighed in favor of the plaintiffs.
However, Judge Bertelsman ruled against the plaintiffs on their ADA discrimination and reasonable accommodation claims. The Court found that no reasonable jury could find that the defendants' handcuffing of the plaintiffs would not have occurred "but
for" their alleged disabilities, as opposed to their behavior on the days in question.
Additionally, Judge Bertelsman held for the defendants on the issue of qualified immunity. Although the Court said it was a close call, it found that the plaintiffs failed to show that it was clearly established that the handcuffing was unconstitutional. The Court found that the Supreme Court precedent that the plaintiffs relied on was too generalized and that the plaintiffs failed to cite to any Sixth Circuit precedent.
On February 7, 2018, the defendants (in their official capacities) filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' constitutional claims under § 1983 for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, claiming state sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment. Before hearing oral argument on the issue of damages, the Court noted that it would take the defendants' motion to dismiss under advisement.
However, following a settlement conference on April 13, 2018, the parties privately reached an agreement whereby the defendants agreed to pay more than $337,000 in damages. The Court dismissed the action with prejudice on November 1, 2018, ordering that each party must pay their own costs.
Maria Ricaurte - 10/18/2015
Eva Richardson - 12/28/2018
compress summary
