A federal judge has dismissed the claim of the parent of a student athlete, who had alleged that a school district was liable for the injuries his son suffered while lifting weights.
Central to the court’s decision to grant the motion for summary judgment filed by the Barbers Hill Independent School District and the coach named in the suit was the fact that the school board was not aware of the athlete’s health situation and that the coach did nothing overt that would imply negligence or racial discrimination, as alleged by the plaintiff.
In April 2008, Perry Robinson Jr. was a fourteen-year-old eighth-grade student at Barbers Hill Middle School, a public middle school in Mont Belvieu, Texas. He participated in multiple school sports, including track, football, and basketball.
On April 7, 2008, Perry Jr. went to his parents and complained of a backache that had begun after running hurdles for track the previous week. They took him to a chiropractor, who wrote a note to the school excusing Perry Jr. from athletics because of a sprained back until April 14, 2008. However, during the week after his chiropractor’s note expired, Perry Jr.’s back continued to bother him.
On April 22, 2008, Perry Jr.’s father, the plaintiff, called the school to speak with his son’s athletic teachers and to tell them that Perry Jr. should not participate in athletics for the remainder of the week because of his back. There was a dispute about whether the guidance counselor communicated his message or told him to communicate with the coaches directly.
The next day, Perry Jr. attended his weight-lifting class. One of the exercises that day was a deadlift, which required Perry Jr. to squat, grip a loaded barbell, and lift it off the floor until he was in a standing position. Perry Jr. did not tell Coach Owens about his backache prior to his first lift of 180 pounds. After this lift, Perry Jr. states that Coach Owens instructed him to add more weight, so they added an additional 90 pounds to the bar for a total of 270 pounds. Perry Jr. had previously lifted that same amount of weight and said that he could do it. This time, he was unsuccessful in his attempt to lift the weight. He stepped back and told Coach Owens that he could not lift the weight and that his back was hurting. Perry Jr. states that Coach Owens told him to finish so the class could be released. Perry Jr. again unsuccessfully attempted to lift the weight. At that point, the period ended and the class left. Perry Jr. told another coach before he left that his “back was hurting real bad.” The coach told him to go to the nurse’s office.
The plaintiff picked up Perry Jr. from school at the end of the day and took him to see a doctor who suggested that he might need back surgery. Perry Jr. continued to participate in athletics for the rest of the school year, but he underwent back surgery on May 23, 2008, and had physical therapy throughout the following summer. The following school year, he could not play football, but he did play basketball and ran track until he was sidelined by bunion surgery. Perry Jr. claimed that his back has continued to be sore since his back surgery.
The plaintiff sued pursuant to Section 1983, which imposes liability upon one who, acting under color of state law, deprives another of a federally protected right. Specifically, he alleged that BHISD exhibited “a custom or practice” that led to a violation of Perry Jr.’s constitutional rights.
“Perry Jr. alleges that Coach Owens treated him differently than white students,” wrote the court. “He further alleges that, after his weight-lifting injury occurred, the school nurse exhibited little concern, put some ice on his back for ten minutes, and sent him back to class. The plaintiff alleges that he went to Perry Jr.’s school the day before his son’s injury to speak to the school nurse and to tell the coaches that Perry Jr.’s back was still bothering him and that he was not to engage in weight-lifting for the rest of that week. The plaintiff alleges that the school nurse refused to allow him to speak directly to the coaches, but that she promised she would e-mail them with the information. Finally, the plaintiff alleges that at a school game prior to his son’s injury, another coach warned him that his son was at an all-white school and that he should take care around Coach Owens.
“This evidence is insufficient to raise a fact issue whether the BHISD Board of Trustees had actual or constructive knowledge of a persistent, widespread practice of any substantive due process violations or racial discrimination by BHISD officials and employees. In short, Plaintiff presents evidence of his own and his son’s interactions with Coach Owens and the school nurse, along with an alleged warning about Coach Owens from another school coach. As the defendant eloquently states, the plaintiff has failed to allege, much less provide summary judgment evidence, ‘that the BHISD School Board adopted policies, regulations, bylaws, or ordinances that contributed to Perry Jr.’s injuries, or that the Board permitted persistent and widespread practices or practices that are permanent and well settled and deeply embedded traditional ways of carrying out policy.’ In fact, BHISD provides evidence that, prior to this lawsuit, the Board of Trustees had never received any complaint about racial discrimination in the school’s athletic program generally or with respect to Coach Owens specifically. Thus, even assuming that Perry Jr.’s constitutional rights were violated, there is simply no evidence allowing the court to impute knowledge to BHISD and, thus, permit liability.”
The court further elaborated on the inapplicability of Section 1983, writing that it has been “unable to find, and the parties have not guided it to, any federal case whatsoever wherein a student has brought suit under Section 1983 for a weight-lifting or other athletics-related injury and succeeded in his or her claim. Even assuming, arguendo, that such an injury could, under some circumstances, support a cause of action under Section 1983 for violation of the right to bodily integrity, the facts in this case simply do not give rise to a supportable claim as a matter of law. The note from Perry Jr.’s doctor excusing him from participating in athletics had expired nine days before his injury. Perry Jr. testified that he could lift the weight on the bar and that he had, in fact, previously lifted the same amount of weight on the same exercise. Even assuming that Plaintiff’s testimony is true that Coach Owens instructed him to deadlift 270 pounds, Coach Owens’ verbal conduct in urging Perry Jr. to complete the exercise is not unconstitutional. On these facts, the court will not extend a student’s liberty interest in bodily integrity to this type of conduct.”
Perry Robinson, Sr. v. Stephen Owens, et al.; S.D. Tex., CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:09-CV-2118, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129644; 11/22/10
Attorneys of Record: (for plaintiff) Joseph H Pedigo, LEAD ATTORNEY, Attorney at Law, Houston, TX. (for defendants) Christopher B Gilbert, LEAD ATTORNEY, Thompson & Horton LLP, Houston, TX.
