A federal judge from the Western District of Texas granted summary judgment to a central Texas school district, effectively dismissing the claim of a high school football player, who claimed the school district and its coaching staff were negligent in protecting him from the multiple concussions he suffered on the playing field.
In so ruling, the court concluded that the evidence presented by the plaintiff was insufficient to raise a question about whether the defendants acted with gross negligence.
Plaintiff Blake Allen Ripple was a football player for Marble Falls High School when he suffered a concussion in October of 2009 after “a helmet-on-helmet collision” during a game.
“Immediately after the injury, the plaintiff was unable to remember what happened, was unsteady on his feet, staggered, and complained of nausea, dizziness, and a severe headache,” according to the complaint. “Plaintiff’s trainer briefly talked to plaintiff on the sidelines after the injury, but he failed to render plaintiff aide and did not continue to observe plaintiff.”
Neither the coach nor the trainer accompanied the parent and player to the hospital for further evaluation.
“The plaintiff was seen and treated at the Mayo Clinic from May 18, 2010 until May 27, 2010,” according to the complaint. “Doctors at the Mayo Clinic believe that the plaintiff may have an autonomic dysfunction brought on by the head injuries the plaintiff had experienced. The plaintiff was told that he could eventually play football again, but that it would take some time before he could get back out on the field.”
Prior to the team’s summer practices, Ripple’s parents notified the head coach, Cord Woerner, of their son’s overall medical condition. According to the complaint, “Coach Woerner told the plaintiff that if the plaintiff could not perform at 110 percent, that he did not want the plaintiff on the team.”
The complaint goes on to state that “on one occasion at practice, Coach Woerner forced the plaintiff to run so hard that that evening the plaintiff started to bleed from his ears and nose. The plaintiff’s parents took the plaintiff to the emergency room, where they were told that the plaintiff was severely dehydrated. The plaintiff’s parents again informed Coach Woerner of the plaintiff’s medical limitations and that the plaintiff’s doctors did not believe that the plaintiff would be ready to play again until midseason.
“Around this time, the plaintiff’s parents had been complaining and corresponding with the Administration Office at the plaintiff’s school. The Administration Office suggested that the plaintiff’s parents just ‘relax’ to avoid any retaliation against the plaintiff.
“Despite Coach Woerner’s receiving frequent reminders of the plaintiff’s medical condition and diminished physical abilities, Coach Woerner continued to punish the plaintiff with excessive physical exercises and drills in order to force him to play for the team. In fact, he put the plaintiff on the field at the teams’ second scrimmage, where he again experienced injuries,” the complaint further states.
The situation continued to deteriorate as the plaintiff was ultimately placed on homebound educational services.
When recruitment letters from D-I schools began arriving, his coach allegedly withheld them from him. Not only that, his coach allegedly admitted releasing Ripple’s medical information to scouts, absent permission from either him or his parents. During this time, the complaint suggests that more demands were being made of Ripple, both in practice and games, since his team was deemed playoff-worthy.
The plaintiff claimed that he is “unable to live independently, let alone go to college. At one time he was one of the highest rated linemen in the Central Texas area and was receiving interest for scholarships from a number of Division I colleges.”
The Ruling
In the aftermath of the lawsuit, the defendant moved for summary judgement, alleging, among other things, insufficient evidence to go to trial.
In particular, the defendant objected to various portions of the plaintiff and his mother’s affidavits, submitted as part of the plaintiff’s summary judgment evidence, “because the statements a) are self-serving, b) contain assertions that are not based in personal knowledge, c) contain hearsay, d) are based on pure speculation, and e) conflict with Plaintiff’s deposition testimony.”
The court delivered a mixed ruling on each of these evidentiary questions.
Also of relevance was the plaintiff’s remaining claim that the defendant failed to keep him safe from harm and failed to provide him an environment that was not injurious to his physical well-being in violation of § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
“The plaintiff points to standards of care set by the Texas Legislature, the University Interscholastic League, and the Marble Falls School Board’s policies and procedures to show that the defendant grossly deviated from professional standards of care,” wrote the court. “More specifically, he points to UIL and school district rules, which dictate that coaches and athletic trainers must be trained and follow applicable law. The plaintiff identifies the following provisions of the Texas Education Code as applicable law:
“Section 33.202, which dictates that the coach and trainer must complete a safety training program with specific training in concussions and head injuries and that the District must provide an annual safety drill on the issues for athletes;
Section 33.204, which prohibits athletic staff from encouraging or permitting students to engage in unreasonably dangerous athletic techniques;
Section 33.205, which requires that coaches and trainers ensure players are adequately hydrated; and
Section 33.206, which requires that the District maintains records on fulfillment of those requirements.”
“Even viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, there is no evidence that the district acted with bad faith or gross professional misjudgment with regard to Ripple’s physical safety. According to the plaintiff, his doctors cleared him annually to play to football. The coaching staff never sent the plaintiff back onto the field during the game when he sustained the injuries he complained of. The only concussion that the plaintiff informed the athletic team about was the one he sustained after the Lampasas game; he avoided reporting and seeking treatment for his concussive symptoms thereafter in an attempt to remain competitive for college scholarships. During the incident in the plaintiff’s senior year when the plaintiff became severely dehydrated and began bleeding out of his nose and ears, the plaintiff attests that the coaching team gave the team water breaks.
“Although there may be a question of fact as to whether failing to fit Ripple’s helmet at the start of his junior season or failing to affirmatively identify signs of concussions through Ripple’s behavior rises to the level of negligence, the facts do not present a question of fact as to whether the defendant acted in bad faith or with gross professional misjudgment.”
RIPPLE v. MARBLE FALLS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; W.D. Tex.; CV. No. 1:12-CV-827-DAE; 3/27/15
Attorneys of Record: (for plaintiff) Daniel Garza, Cirkiel & Associates, P.C. & Martin J. Cirkiel, Cirkiel & Associates, P.C. (for defendant) Bridget Robinson, Walsh, Anderson, Gallegos, Green & Trevino, P.C.
The full opinion can be viewed at http://leagle.com/decision/In FDCO 20150416802/RIPPLE v. MARBLE FALLS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
