A federal judge from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted summary judgment to a school district, which was sued by a student athlete over the handling of a pair of concussions he allegedly suffered during a junior varsity football game.
The court sided with the defendant after concluding that the defendant had policies and practices in place with regard to the appropriate handling of concussions suffered by student athletes.
The concussions occurred on Oct. 25, 2010, when plaintiff William Croce was playing the guard position for West Chester East High School in a game against Bishop Shanahan High School.
Croce claimed he blocked an opponent and then “blacked out for a second on the field. While on the field, after he came to, the plaintiff grasped his head with both hands due to the severe pain he was experiencing in his head.” He then went to the sidelines, where he allegedly told his coaches that his head hurt. However, “at no time did Coach Richards or any member of the coaching or training staff examine plaintiff to determine whether he needed medical attention or even to determine if he had a concussion,” according to the complaint.
“Near the end of the game, Coach Richards reinserted the plaintiff into the game on a kickoff as a member of the special teams,” claimed the plaintiff. On that play, Croce was knocked unconscious again. He went on to note that participating on special teams plays “is universally known to the entire football community as producing the most violent collisions between players.”
Croce allegedly struggled the next day and for several days after that, displaying symptoms of a concussion, including nausea, dizziness, headaches, and difficulty sleeping. His doctor would later find that he “failed all balance and concussion tests,” according to the complaint. A concussion specialist would later place him “on brain rest until mid-December when finally he was cleared to meet with a tutor one to two hours at a time.”
The plaintiff sued, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking compensation from the West Chester School District, for violating his Constitutional rights. More specifically, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant deprived him of his bodily integrity under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that it may not be held vicariously liable for the actions of its employees, and that the plaintiff has not demonstrated that any of the defendant’s policies or practices caused his injuries.
The court reviewed the plaintiff’s argument that “reinserting him into the football game after he sustained the first head injury constitutes deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for his safety, and that this was part of the defendant’s custom or policy. He also avers that the coaches, trainers, and other staff and team members were inadequately prepared to recognize and react to a concussion, and that the defendant created this situation.”
However, to prevail in such a claim, the plaintiff “must show a ‘direct causal link’ between the policy and a constitutional violation.” Sanford v. Stiles, 456 F.3d 298, 314 (3d Cir. 2006) (quoting Brown v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Dep’t of Health Emergency Med. Servs. Training Inst., 318 F.3d 473, 482 (3d Cir. 2003)). Additionally, the plaintiff “must show that the municipality acted with ‘deliberate indifference’ toward the rights of its students.” Id. (quoting Brown, 318 F.3d at 479).
The court continued: “The plaintiff has not shown that the defendant had a policy of ignoring or failing to adequately diagnose, treat, or respond to concussions, nor has he shown that it acted with deliberate indifference toward the rights of its students. To the contrary, the undisputed evidence shows that the defendant had a policy and custom of taking sports safety, including concussion responsiveness and diagnosis, seriously. The sworn statement of the school’s head athletic trainer, Mark Grothmann, pertaining to the school’s concussion protocol is as follows: An athletic trainer was always present at all football games. Reply of Def. West Chester Area Sch. Dist. to Pl.’s Dep. Interrog. at ¶ 2, 4, Doc. No. 28. The athletic trainers are well-trained in concussion diagnosis and protocols, and all coaches received instruction regarding concussion diagnosis protocol. Id. at ¶ 4. In addition, coaches ‘are instructed to send any child whom they suspect has suffered a head injury straight to the athletic trainer who is on site at the game at all times, so that the athletic trainer can properly evaluate the player for not only a concussion, but for any other suspected head injuries.’” Id.
Furthermore, “the school followed the concussion protocols generated via the Consensus Statement on Concussion in Sport: The Third International Conference on Concussion in Sport held in Zurich in November 2008 (the Zurich Statement). Id. All West Chester East School District players were baseline tested with ‘ImPact’ testing prior to the 2010 junior varsity season. Id. at ¶ 5. There was a mandatory screening for all coaches of the United States Department of Health and Human Services CDS Instructional video entitled ‘Heads up Concussions in High School Sports.’ Id. at ¶ 6. Mr. Grothmann believes that ‘in his 13 years of serving as the Athletic Trainer at West Chester Area School District, [the plaintiff] is the only student who has alleged that he (or she) told an athletic coach that he (or she) was suffering from headaches or head issues and was re-inserted into a game without being reported to the athletic trainer.’ Id. at ¶ 16. There were nine reported concussions on the varsity and junior varsity football teams combined between August 2006 and May 2010, id. at ¶ 8, and there is no evidence to suggest that the coaches and trainers did not follow the aforementioned concussion protocol in each case. There is absolutely no evidence developed through discovery to suggest that the defendant had a policy, practice, or custom of indifference to the health and safety of its students.
“The plaintiff has not shown that there is any issue of material fact that warrants sending this matter to a jury.”
William Croce v. West Chester School District; E.D. Pa.; CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-6831, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45665; 4/8/15
Attorneys of Record: (for plaintiff) Gregory G. Stagliano, Lead Attorney, Media, PA. (for defendant) John F. Kennedy, Bodell Bove LLC, Philadelphia, PA; Thomas P. Grace, Grace & Kennedy, PC, Philadelphia, PA.
