Nevada County Picayune and Gurdon Times Newspaper Archive

Plaintiffs make claims in suit

A mother who is has filed a federal lawsuit against the Gurdon School District and several of its employees is making an array of allegations against the defendants, according to a copy of the suit obtained from the U.S. District Court clerks office in Fort Smith.

The suit, filed by Jane Doe, parent and next friend of John Doe, a minor, names Gurdon Superintendent Bobby Smithson, High School Principal Leonard Gills, Dean of Students Scott Jones, GHS Special Education teacher Carolyn McClure and Resource teacher Edna Cooper all in their personal and official capacities, as well as the Gurdon School Board.

The Gurdon School District is denying all of the allegations of the suit, Smithson said in a recent school board meeting. He said that the school and its employees had dotted every i and crossed every t.

The suit states that the minor Doe is a special education student as determined by the Defendants pursuant academic placement. The purpose of the suit, as is stated in the court records, is for declaratory and injunctive relief, for damages from deprivation of a constitutional right to an education, and for damages caused by placing the student in the criminal justice system.

According to the suit, the school district formed an individual education plan for the student. The IEP was agreed to by the parent. However, the school is accused of not instituting a behavior modification, citing no prior behavioral problems. The suit states that there had been behavior problems with the student in the past.

Another complaint addressed in the suit deals with placing the student in the criminal justice system. The school district has twice caused minor plaintiff to be placed within the Arkansas criminal justice system for complaints which ordinarily had been resolved for other students by the rules set forth in the school districts student handbook, it states.

The lawsuit implies that there is a reason the school district is handling the situation this way. Ordinarily, defendants would apply the school policy involving such incidents. However, in the case of minor plaintiff, defendants punishment of minor plaintiff is purposely harsh because defendants want to rid their school system of minor plaintiff Doe and his mother, Jane Doe.

Other complaints in the suit include an allegation that the school district had the student evaluated by a psychological expert but then refused to institute the recommendations of the expert. The plaintiffs also claim that the student was physically abused by one of the defendants and that the school refused to investigate. The suit states that the matter is not under investigation by the U.S. Department of Education.

Defendants continue to harass, berate, punish, physically abuse and deny minor plaintiff Doe certain school privileges, including the privilege to ride on the school bus, and the privilege to receive a free appropriate education tailored to his particular disabilities, with the students who do not suffer from disabilities, the suit states.

Jane Doe asks the court to give a judgement stating that the student has been deprived of his constitutional rights and a mandatory injunctive relief to force the school district to recognize the student as handicapped and to comply with the IEP. She is also seeking damages for the deprivation of constitutional rights and compensatory and punitive damages from the defendants for having caused the placement of the student in the criminal justice system. She also seeks to be awarded attorney fees and the cost of defending the student in the juvenile criminal courts.

The case is set for trial in August.