A federal judge from the Southern District of Alabama has granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss in a case where they were sued by several student athletes, who alleged that they suffered sexual, physical, and emotional harassment and abuse at the hands of a coach, while the co-defendants in the case enabled the abuse.
The plaintiffs in the case were former and current volleyball players at University of South Alabama (USA). They alleged that the harassment and abuse they suffered was administered by Alexis Meeks-Rydell during her 2019-2020 tenure as the Women’s Volleyball coach at USA.
According to the plaintiffs, Coach Meeks-Rydell “created a climate of fear and intimidation” in which she regularly “ swore” at the plaintiffs and made abusive comments to them,” accused them of faking injuries, forced them to play through serious medical conditions (including a concussion) and imposed punishment in violation of NCAA rules, such as morning breakfast clubs, which consisted of 4:00 a.m. practice drills that would continue until players vomited, passed out or cried due to inability to continue. The plaintiffs also generally alleged that Coach Meeks-Rydell “physically and/or sexually groomed and inappropriately touched” volleyball players, including the plaintiffs, and engaged in physical and sexual conduct.
They also alleged that several university officials, including defendant Joel Erdmann, who served as USA Athletic Director and as Coach Meeks-Rydell’s direct supervisor, defendant Jinni Frisbey, who served as USA Associate Athletic Director and as Coach Meeks-Rydell’s director supervisor, defendant Chris Moore, who served as USA Associate Athletic Director and as Coach Meeks-Rydell’s direct supervisor, defendant Rob Chilcoat, who served as USA Assistant Coach of the volleyball team, and defendant Patricia Galdolf, who served as USA Assistant Coach of the volleyball team, all had direct knowledge of Coach Meeks-Rydell’s sexual harassment, and physical and emotional abuse of players, including the plaintiffs, and had the authority to take corrective action, but failed to do so.
The second amended complaint was dismissed after the court determined it was an impermissible “shotgun pleading.” The ruling in the instant opinion concerned the third amended complaint.
Did Coach Order Player to Conceal Concussion?
Among the significant, specific allegations made by some of the individual plaintiffs was that made by Rachel DeMarcus. Enrolled at USA with a full volleyball scholarship in 2018, DeMarcus alleged that after she was hit in the head by another player’s knee during a September 14, 2019, volleyball game. She claimed she informed Coach Meeks-Rydell that she could not see well and was dizzy. “However, Coach Meeks-Rydell instructed DeMarcus to play notwithstanding her head injury, and also ordered her to conceal the extent of the injury from the athletic trainer because concussion protocols would have required to DeMarcus to refrain from playing for a number of weeks,” according to the opinion. “Demarcus asserts that days following the game, the athletic director informed Coach Meeks- Rydell that DeMarcus had suffered a severe concussion, and in response, Meeks-Rydell denied any knowledge of the injury. She further alleges that the athletic trainer informed the co-defendant Frisbey of DeMarcus’ injury and of the coaching staff’s indifference to DeMarcus’ health and safety.
“DeMarcus asserts that as result of the concussion, she had impaired vision, constant headaches, and a severe loss of appetite. She further contends that shortly after Meeks-Rydell began her abusive coaching tactics, she developed symptoms of Supra Ventricular Tachycardia (SVT), and notwithstanding the concern of team physicians, Coach Meeks-Rydell coerced and/or forced her to engage in breakfast clubs, practice, and games. According to DeMarcus, as a result of the severity of her SVT, she had to undergo significant testing, wear heart monitors, take a break from volleyball and ultimately undergo an ablation procedure to address the SVT. DeMarcus contends that all of these events resulted from Coach Meeks-Rydell’s wrongful conduct and that the university defendants’ knowing failure to take corrective action, caused further mental, emotional, and physical trauma. DeMarcus asserts that on December 3, 2019, she informed Coach Meeks-Rydell that she was transferring from USA.”
Concussions were also an issue for plaintiff Hannah Johnson. Johnson enrolled at USA in 2017 and played on the volleyball team both before and during Meeks-Rydell’s tenure as the Women’s head volleyball coach.
According to Johnson, in the spring of 2019, Coach Meeks- Rydell and co-defendant Chilcoat instituted a practice drill whereby they would spike balls toward the faces of the volleyball team members. In February 2019, Johnson suffered a concussion after defendant Chilcoat spiked a ball into her head during one of the drills. Following Jones’ concussion, her mother contacted Frisbey and other members of the University’s Administration to notify them of the “highly concerning and improper practices Meeks-Rydell, Chilcoat, and co-defendant Gandolfo were conducting with the Volleyball Team, and how such improper practices concerned the health and safety of Johnson and the Volleyball Team Members under the defendants.”
In the defendants’ motion to dismiss, they again claimed the complaint was deficient, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).
Court’s Analysis
The court considered Johnson early in its analysis, noting that “she suffered a concussion in February 2019 after Defendant Chilcoat spiked a ball that hit her head during drills. Johnson asserts that she suffered a concussion as a result, and following her concussion, her mother contacted defendant Frisbey and other members of the University’s Administration to notify them of the ‘highly concerning and improper practices Defendants Meeks-Rydell, Chilcoat, and Gandolfo were conducting with the Volleyball Team, and how such improper practices concerned the health and safety of Johnson and the Volleyball Team Members under Defendants.’
“The Court finds that Johnson’s allegations as to what her mother told Frisbey in 2019 is not alleged with sufficient detail to establish actual knowledge of sexual harassment, assuming that Frisbey was an appropriate person for reporting purposes. Gebser, 524 U.S. at 291 (the Supreme Court noted that a single complaint from parents charging that a teacher made ‘inappropriate comments during class’ was ‘plainly insufficient’ to provide actual knowledge of the teacher’s relationship with a student).”
The court also considered the plaintiffs’ substantive due process claims against the USA defendants, namely that Erdmann, Frisbey, Moore, Chilcoat and Gandolfo, had knowledge of Coach Meeks- Rydell’s sexual, emotional, and physical abuse of the plaintiffs and failed to take appropriate corrective action.
“Supervisors are not responsible for their subordinate’s unconstitutional acts ‘based on respondeat-superior or vicarious-liability principles.’ Piazza v. Jefferson Cnty, Ala., 923 F.3d 947, 957 (llth Cir. 2019). Instead, a supervisor can only be held liable under Section 1983 ‘when the supervisor persona participates in the alleged constitutional violation or when there is a causal connection between actions of the supervising official and the alleged constitutional violation.’ Gonzalez v. Reno, 325 F.3d 1228, 1235 (llth Cir. 2003). To state a claim against a government actor for a violation of substantive due process, a plaintiff must allege conduct that ‘shocks the conscience.’ Waddell v. Hendry County Sheriff’s Office, 329 F.3d 1300, 1305. A state official’s deliberate indifference may constitute a due process violation but, in the ‘non -custodial setting,’ the alleged violation would ‘require a showing of deliberate indifference to an extremely great risk of serious injury to someone in the plaintiffs’ position.” Id.
The court noted that the Plaintiffs’ allegations against the defendants “are vague at best. None of the individual the plaintiffs have alleged that any of these the defendants engaged in any conduct that could arguably be described as sexually harassing. While the plaintiffs have alleged that defendants Chilcoat and Gandolfo, both assistant coaches, were present during some of the extreme practices and drills, and that in February 2019, plaintiff Johnson suffered a concussion when Chilcoat spiked a ball that hit her head during practice drills, said conduct pales in comparison to the professor’s conduct that was found to be insufficient in Dacosta. And, the plaintiffs’ assertions that the defendants were deliberately indifferent is belied by their own factual assertions that plaintiffs Maddux and Soboleski informed defendants Erdmann and Frisby of Coach Meeks- Rydell sexual harassment during a meeting in December 2020, and Coach Meeks-Rydell was placed on administrative leave in January 2021. While the plaintiffs conclusory allege that Coach Meeks-Rydell still had access to the team through the assistant coaches, the third amended complaint is devoid of any allegations that plaintiffs continued to be subject to sexual or other abuse from Coach Meeks-Rydell or anyone else. Simply put, the plaintiffs have failed to plausibly allege any conscience-shocking conduct by any of these defendants. Because the plaintiffs’ claims are not sufficient to establish a substantive due process violation, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on the plaintiffs’ 1983 claims.”
Thus, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the claim.
Rachel Demarcus, et al. v. University of South Alabama et al.; S.D. Ala.; Civil Action No. 21-00380-Kd-B; 3/27/23
