kevin house lawsuit against west clermont schools
Post on 10-Jan-2016
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTIONHere is the federal lawsuit filed by the family of Kevin House against the West Clermont School District.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OHIO
Tom Robinson, in his individual capacity,
Robert Hatfield, in his individual capacity,
1. Constitutional principles, anti-discrimination and disability education statutes,
State of Ohio policies and regulations, and common law all bar unreasonable and otherwise
unlawful seizure and restraint of, and excessive force against, a student with autism and
cognitive and other multiple disabilities in a special school program. Law enforcement officers
and school officials cannot lawfully handcuff a student with multiple disabilities in that school
program designed to address the students behavioral challenges and then leave him prone for an
Kevin House,by and through his guardian, mother,and next friend Debbie Lynn House,
Union Township, Ohio,
West Clermont Local School DistrictBoard of Education,
Steven Siekbert, in his individual capacity,
Case No. 1:15-CV-00585
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FORDECLARATORY RELIEF,PERMANENTINJUNCTIVE RELIEF, ANDCOMPENSATORY MONETARYDAMAGES
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 1 of 20 PAGEID #: 1
extended period. The totality of circumstances in this matter and the foreseeable significant
emotional injury to the disabled student bar the seizure, restraint, and excessive force.
2. Mechanical restraint of students and prone restraint of students are each unlawful
in Ohio yet the Defendants simultaneously applied both to Plaintiff Kevin House. a student with
disabilities attending an educational program for students with disabilities. The Defendants
acted recklessly. purposefully, and with deliberate indifference. In fact, they would do it all
again. The Plaintiffs address the Defendants systemic conduct and training deficiencies and seek
to prevent a recurrence of the Defendants unlawful seizure, restraint, and use of excessive force
against Kevin and against all other similarly situated children.
3. Kevin is a young man with multiple disabilities including autism, moderate
intellectual disability, epilepsy, and behavioral challenges. In September 2014. for reasons
directly related to his behavioral challenges. Kevin attended the Aspire Academy II program on
the Glen Este campus of the West Clermont Local School District. Kevin had an Individualized
Educational Program (1EV) and a professionally prepared Behavior Plan. Kevins Behavior
Plan identified that lie sometimes engaged in behaviors including aggression toward staff
including throwing items, hitting, kicking, and biting and that one of the purposes of the
Behavior Plan was to redirect Kevin from this aggressive behavior. On September 11, 2014, the
Defendants knowingly and recklessly ignored Kevins Behavior Plan and instead significantly
injured Kevin by unreasonably seizing him, using excessive force, and othenvise depriving the
student of rights protected under law. The Defendants systemically ignored essential law and
policy at the time and they systemically ignore that law and policy now.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1334.
23 U.S.C. 2201 and 2202. and 2$ U.S.C. 1361.
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 2 of 20 PAGEID #: 2
5. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) because the
Plaintiff resides in Clermont county, Ohio, the Defendants provide services in Clermont County,
Ohio, and the events giving rise to this action occurred in Clermont County, Ohio.
6. Kevin is now 20-years old and resides in Clermont County, Ohio. with his
parents. Kevin has multiple disabilities including, but not limited to, autism, moderate
intellectual disability with an IQ level of 46, epilepsy, and behavioral challenges. Kevin is
entitled to the full protection of the United States Constitution, federal and state anti-
discrimination states, common law, and State of Ohio restraint policies. Kevin brings this action
through his mother and next friend Debbie Lynn I-louse.
7. Debbie Lynn House is Kevins mother and resides in Clermont County, Ohio.
8. Steven Siekbert (Siekbert) is a police officer employed by the Union Township.
Ohio, Police Department. Siekbert served as the School Resource Officer for Aspire Academy II
and other West Clermont programs on its Glen Este campus.
9. Tom Robinson (Robinson) was Kevins classroom teacher and is employed by
the West Clermont Local School District.
10. Robert Hatfield (Hatfield) was the assistant principal at Glen Este High School.
II. Union Township. Ohio. is a statutory local government entity under Ohio law and
is capable of suing and being sued. Union Township operates a police department (Police
Department or Union Township) that is a law enforcement agency in Clermont County, Ohio.
12. West Clermont Local School District Board of Education (West Clermont or
school district) is an entity organized and existing under Ohio law and is capable of suing and
being sued. West Clermont created Kevins IEP and Behavior Plan.
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 3 of 20 PAGEID #: 3
13. Kevin had just turned 19-years old on September 11, 2014, when Police Officer
Siekbert teacher Robinson, and assistant principal Hatfield handcuffed Kevin in school, during
school hours, and placed him prone on the ground for approximately 30 minutes.
14. Kevin has been a student enrolled in the West Clermont Local School District for
16 years. In September 2014, Kevin attended Aspire Academy, a West Clermont transition
program intended to teach Kevin daily living, functional, and work skills, to remediate his
challenging behaviors, and to prepare him to live and work as independently as possible.
15. Aspire Academy II is designed for students who have an IEP. otherwise have met
graduation requirements consistent with their IEP. but defer their diploma in order to attend the
Aspire Academy transition program.
16. West Clermont and Union Township have an agreement for Union Township to
provide a School Resource Officer for the West Clermont Glen Este campus including Aspire
17. Defendant Siekbert is a law enforcement officer employed by Union Township
who was based in the West Clermont Glen Este campus as a School Resource Officer on
September 11. 2014. Several weeks earlier, Kevins mother Debbie House had shown a
photograph of Kevin to Siekbert and informed him that Kevin attended a special program at the
school and that he had autism and behavioral challenges.
18. In 2009, the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a
nationwide stiLdy documenting hundreds of incidents of restraint and seclusion in schools from
1990-2009 including 20 incidents causing death. Almost all the identified incidents involved
students with disabilities. The GAO presented its study before the United States House of
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 4 of 20 PAGEID #: 4
Representatives Education and Labor Committee. The GAO explained that even without
physical injury a student could be severely traumatized by a restraint.
19. Following the GAO report and testimony, United States Secretary of EdiLcation
Arne Duncan requested that each state review and revise its restraint and seclusion policies.
20. On January 15. 2013, the Ohio State Board of Education approved the policy on
Positive Behavior Interventions and Support and Restraint and Seclusion. The Ohio policy
mandates that each school district must have a policy that specifically indicates that the use of
prone restraint ... is prohibited. The policy further mandates that each school district is
required to have a plan regarding the training of its staff in accordance with this policy On
April 9. 2013. the State Board of Education approved Ohio Administrative Code Section 330 1-
35-15 prohibiting prone restraint and mechanical restraint.
21. West Clermonts Bylaws and Policies Section 5630.01Positive Behavior
Intervention and Supports and Limited Use of Restraint and Seclusion provides: The Board is
committed to the District-wide use of Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS) with
students . . . . Professional staff members and support staff determined appropriate by the
Superintendent are permitted to physically restrain . . . a student . . . but only when . . . there is no
other safe and effective intervention possible, and the physical restraint ... is used in a manner
that is age and developmentally appropriate.
22. West Clermont Bylaws and Policies Section 5630.01 reqiLires: All restraint
shall only be done in accordance with this Policy, which is based on the standards adopted by the
State Board of Education regarding the use of student restraint Training in methods of PBIS
and the use of restraint ill be provided to all professional staff and support staff determined
appropriate by the Superintendent. Training will be in accordance with the States Standards.
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 5 of 20 PAGEID #: 5
Only school staff who are trained in permissible . . . physical restraint measures shall use such
23. Section 5630.01 prohibits mechanical restraints such as handcifffi and prohibits
prone restraints. The Bylaws and Policies plainly provides that physical restraint, mechanical
restraint, prone restraint, and chemical restraint are all different and leaves no doubt: The use of
restraint other than physical restraint is prohibited. Furthermore, physical restraint may be
implemented only by Student Personnel who have been trained in accordance with this Policy to
protect the care, welfare, dignity and safety of the student . . . . The Defendants violated West
Clermonts own Bylaws and Policies by mechanically restraining Kevin, by placing and keeping
him prone. and by failing to protect his care, welfare, dignity and safety.
24. As part of its planning for Kevins education, West Clermont created an essential
Behavior Plan for Kevin to describe his needs and to inform the responsive conduct of the
officials responsible for his welfare. Among other things, the Behavior Plan identified that
Kevins behavior also seems to be exacerbated when provided attention for disruptive
behavior. Also: During tantrums Kevin is likely to engage in aggression toward staff and
sometimes peers. Staff indicates he is more difficult to physically manage during intense
outbursts. The following behavior plan includes positive strategies currently in place to
proactively prevent difficulties and teach Kevin appropriate replacement behaviors. in addition
to a crisLc plan to lie/p keep Kevin and others safe during intense burst of behavior (emphasis
25. Kevins behavior plan required that staff working directly with Kevin needs to
be trained in safe physical management All staff working with Kevin needs to be trained in
the behavior plan cz;zcl implement the plan as written (emphasis added).
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 6 of 20 PAGEID #: 6
26. The target behaviors in Kevins behavior plan included aggression (hitting,
kicking, scratching, throwing items, biting) and disruptive behaviors (throwing materials and
tipping furniture). The behavior plan directed staff to [u]se a calm matter of fact tone in all
interactions with Kevin and that The more talking the more escalated Kevin becomes!! (all
emphasis in original).
27. Kevins behavior plan added Yelling at or arguing with Kevin is considered a
challenge and will usually escalate matters to a physical confrontation (all emphasis in
28. The behavior plan had a Crisis Plan within it. The Crisis Plan directed the
adults responsible for Kevins welfare: Once Kevin has become physical, only one person
should talk to Kevin . . . . A CPI [Crisis Prevention Institute] hold should only be used as a last
resort. Kevin becomes more aggravate[d] when more people are in the room.
29. Needless to say, handcuffing and prone restraint are not CPI holds.
30. Kevins behavior plan instructed the adults responsible for Kevin how to
administer CPI Trained Holds: During holds, Kevins airway should be continually
monitored. While Kevin is being restrained [with CPI holds], he usually screams to be let go,
and name calls. Kevin is instructed by the team that as soon as he is quiet and still, the team will
walk away from him and remind that he is to go sit in the swing when they let him go. This is
repeated periodically throughout the restraint in a calm, nonthreatening manner.
31. After a CPI hold is released, the Behavior Plan specifies that the individuals
attending to Kevin should help him physically cool down by placing a fan to blow air on him and
providing him with a cold drink. The plan requires that the staff give Kevin the option to swing
until he has completely calmed down and is able to return to the classroom
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 7 of 20 PAGEID #: 7
32. Siekbert, Robinson, Hatfield, Union Township, and West Clermont violated
Union Township policies and procedures, West Clermont policies and procedures, State of Ohio
policies and regulations, and Kevins particularized Behavior Plan, all proscribing the use against
Kevin of mechanical restraints like handcuffs and proscribing the use of prone positions. In
fact, the Defendants siuzziltaneously applied to Kevin both mechanical restraints and prolonged
33. On September 11. 2014, while in attendance at Aspire Academy. Kevin
accidentally broke his ear buds for his iPad and became very upset. Kevin began shouting and
throwing sonic objects. He struck Aspire Academy staff and attempted to bite when they
restrained him. About eight adults entered the room and it was very noisy. Two individuals
unsuccessfully tried to hold Kevin.
34. Approximately 10 minutes after Kevin became upset, the West Clermont staff
called School Resource Officer Siekbert. Defendant Siekbert arrived a few minutes later,
preempted Kevins Behavior Plan and State of Ohio and West Clermont policy, and assisted
West Clermont staff to lower Kevin to a prone position. Siekbert then placed handcuffs on Kevin
behind Kevins back and left him prone. Defendants Robinson and Hatfield assisted Siekbert in
securing the mechanical restraint and prone positioning. Hatfield further increased the risk of
Kevin becoming asphyxiated by placing a pillow under his head. Defendants Siekbert,
Robinson, and I-Iatfield acted knowingly and recklessly and disregarded the substantial and
unjustifiable risk of injury to Kevin.
35. About five minutes after Siekbert handcuffed Kevin and placed him in a prone
position other Union Township Police Department officers arrived in the room where Kevin was
prone and handcuffed.
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 8 of 20 PAGEID #: 8
36. West Clermont staff called Plaintiff Debbie House during the incident and spoke
with her for about nine minutes. Nevertheless, nobody informed Kevins mom that they had
called Siekbert and did not inform her that Siekbert and others had mechanically restrained
Kevin with handcuffs and had placed him in a prone position.
37. Almost 30 minutes into the incident, and after Kevin had been handcuffed and
placed prone, a West Clermont staff person called Debbie House crying. The staff person
informed Kevins mom that the police had placed Kevin in handcuffs and he was lying on the
floor screaming. In Houses words: I thought I was going to throw up. Another West
Clermont official took the phone and told Kevins mom that they were not going to press
38. While Kevin was handcuffed and prone, Defendants Siekbert and Robinson,
working with other officials, forced Kevin to swallow a medicine tablet.
39. Kevins father arrived at the school about 40 minutes into the incident and about
25 minutes after Kevin had been handcuffed and placed prone. Kevin was still lying prone on
the floor and screaming: Im going to jail. Im arrested. Even after Kevins father arrived
Siekbert would not release the handcuffs or change Kevins position until approved by his
40. Kevins seizure with mechanical and prone restraints was not justified at its
inception and was not jusEified in its continuation for an extended period of time.
41. The lack of pedagogical purpose, Kevins multiple disabilities, the known and
predictable adverse consequences, and the means used and extended time render the seizure and
use of force objectively unreasonable.
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 9 of 20 PAGEID #: 9
42. When the Defendants finally ended their mechanical and prone restraint, Kevins
father took Kevin home. Kevin was unable to return to Aspire Academy. 1-Ic instead now
attends the Clermont County Board of Developmental Disabilities Thomas A. Wildey Center.
43. The Affidavit of Alicia Cachat Logeman (Logeman Affidavit). M.Ed.. State of
Ohio recognized BCBA, Board Certified Behavioral Analyst. describes Kevin and what he
confronted from his perspective:
Autism is a disorder of brain development and is commonly characterizedby difficulties with communication, social interactions, and repetitivebehaviors. Kevin communicates verbally, but verbal individuals withautism can struggle with using functional language to get their wants andneeds met. When Kevin was placed in a high anxiety situation(mechanical restraints in a prone position), he was not able to deescalateand process the situation. He was not able to use the language he doeshave, to appropriately express his fear, discomfort, and anxiety. Kevinreported he didnt understand why he was mechanically restrained. I-Icbelieved his headphones were broken and immediately reacted instead ofprocessing the situation. This is very common with individuals on theautism spectrum. After his headphones were broken, Kevin engaged ininappropriate behaviors when the team did not understand what he wastrying to communicate. Individuals with autism may also have troubleregulating their emotions and this leads to inappropriate responses tosituations. Kevin did not understand why he was handcuffed anddescribes the incident as going to war when he was handcuffed by thestaff at Aspire Academy.
44. The Logeman Affidavit confirms:
Kevins behavior plan clearly states the interventions that are appropriateand have proven successful with him in situations prior to September 11,2014. Kevin becomes more agitated when more people are in the roomwith him and once he has become physical, only one person should bespeaking to him in a calm, matter of fact tone. The behavior plan alsoclearly states that yelling or arguing with Kevin will usually escalatematters.
45. The behavioral expert also attested:
Despite the extremely detailed behavior plan that outlines specificinterventions, crisis planning, and interventions to use, the documentationby the school staff lists multiple violations of this plan. The district in their
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 10 of 20 PAGEID #: 10
voluntary police statements reports multiple violations of the behaviorplan. The district reports multiple people speaking with Kevin during theincident (no clear team leader identified), all individuals interacting didnot use safe physical management (ineffectively blocking strikes, lackappropriate CPI safe holds, and the use of mechanical restraints) andKevin was not directed to a preferred sensory activity. The school resourceofficer was not trained in crisis prevention intervention. Kevin washandcuffed, put into an extended prone position, and was not providedaccess to mental health and medical treatment after the incident.
46. The Logeman Affidavit emphasizes:
According to the Ohio Department of Education Policy of PositiveBehavior Interventions and Support, and Restraint and Seclusion, theprone restraint is prohibited under all circumstances, including emergencysafety situations. Any restraint that unduly risks serious harm or needlesspain to the student is also a prohibited practice.
47. The behavioral expert explained:
The behavior plan states that all individuals working with Kevin must betrained in safe physical management. The staff and resource officer did notdisplay the correct use of CPI. Instead of using the behavior support plantraining and CPI, Kevin was handcuffed and placed in the prone positionfor an extended period of time. This type of response might conceivablyoccur in a public place where the individuals encountering Kevin have notraining, or knowledge of his history of behaviors or diagnosis of autism.The staff involved had a specific behavior support plan, experience withKevin, and knowledge of his disabilities. The staff was also aware of hisreactions in frustrating or anxiety provoking situations. This training andinformation was disregarded, and mechanical restraints and an extendedprone position were utilized instead of his behavior plan.
48. Defendants West Clermont and Union Township have an agreement requiring that
Union Township provide a police officer known as a School Resource Officer to the school
districts Glen Este campus including Aspire Academy. That agreement provides that the police
officer will perform his/her regular police patrol duties in addition to those duties listed in the
School Resource Officer job description addendum . .
49. The previously referenced job description addendum emphasizes that the School
Resource Officer specializes in involvement with local school officials and students in the role
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 11 of 20 PAGEID #: 11
of advisor, mentor, and protector. The job description addendum further emphasizes that the
School Resource Officer [p]erforms duties under the guidelines, policies, procedures, and
operating orders of the police department.
50. According to the West Clermont agreement with Union Township, the School
Resource Officer is required to have knowledge of education techniques, . . crisis intervention,
51. The agreement between West Clermont and Union Township required that
Union Township will hire, train, equip, supervise, manage, and evaluate appropriate personnel
selected for the School Resource Officer program.
52. Union Township Police Department General Order PM 6-02 Response to
Resistance instructs police officers: The amount and type of response to resistance used by
members will be determined in each situation by the circumstances facing the member at the
time. Factors involved in a members decision to use an appropriate response may include, but
are not limited to, any of the following . . . The . . . mental characteristics of the offender . .
Whenever any prisoner is suffering from an injury requiring treatment, first aid procedures will
begin as soon as possible afier the person is secured and the incident scene is safe.
53. Union Township Police Department General Order PM 6-02 Response to
Resistance, Section XVIII. A. requires that a supervisor conduct an investigation and submit a
report up the chain of command to the Operations Bureau Commander who makes a
recommendation to the Police Departments CEO. The CEO then makes a final
disposition and forwards it to the Administrative Services Commander. Section XVIII. A.
cross-references Section I.I.a-i which includes as reportable response to resistance incident
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 12 of 20 PAGEID #: 12
both takedowns, person taken to ground and any incident of unusual nature as determined by
the on-duty supervisor. Union Township has not provided these reports to the Plaintiff
54. Union Township has not properly trained, supervised, or managed its police
officers serving as School Resource Officers. The need to properly train, supervise, and manage
School Resource Officers with regard to the students at Aspire Academy, in particular, is an
obvious necessity and the risk of injury to students from Union Townships failure is very great
55. Upon information and belief. Union Township did not train Seikbert about the
aforementioned State of Ohio policies. \Vest Clermont policies, or the behavior plans of students
such as Plaintiff Kevin House.
56. A psychiatrist with Cincinnati Childrens Hospital Medical Center, Division of
Child Psvchiatiy. who has treated Kevin since 2008 concluded in 2015: Since the incident at
school in September . . . , [Kevin] has also been displaying post-traumatic stress
symptoms. including flashbacks, nightmares, and avoidance I have personally witnessed him
recoiling when hc is in our lobby and a security officer walks past, in which case he will grab
and hug his mother. This represents a definite change from his previous behavior and level of
anxiety. and it has now gone on for a duration consistent with PTSD. We are trying to provide
medication treatment for this, but the symptoms persist and worsen at times.
57. Kevin had to be taken to the hospital for an emergency visit on September 17,
2014, because of increased anxiety, self-abuse, and perseverations.
58. Kevin obsesses about the September 11, 2014, incident daily. He has
developmentally, socially, and emotionally regressed to the point of carrying a stuffed animal as
a protector with him when meeting new people. He also sleeps with stuffed animals for
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 13 of 20 PAGEID #: 13
protection. Pie frequently mentions that he thought he was going to be killed. Kevin limits his
access to the community due to the fear of being arrested. He often requires rescue medication to
control ovenvhelming anxiety. Long-term, Kevins opportunity for employment as well as living
independently from his parents (with support) in the community has dramatically decreased due
to his overwhelming anxiety and fear of leaving the house. He requires long-tern psychological
care to help him diminish the effects of the incident but he will never forget what happened to
59. In addition to significant and ongoing emotional distress, Kevin experienced
physical pain and injury during and after the seizure, restraint, and use of excessive force
described in this Complaint including, but not limited to, significant bruising.
60. Kevin remains enrolled as a student in the West Clermont Local School District
even though he now attends Wildey. West Clermont pays the Clermont County Board of
Developmental Disabilities for the cost of Kevins attendance at Wildey.
61. Upon information and belief, the Defendants do not use handcuffs and extended
prone restraint in response to conduct that is expected and predictable for typical students in the
manner the Defendants did with Kevin.
62. Upon information and belief, the Defendants do not expose typical students to the
risk of serious physical and emotional injury for conduct that is expected and predictable for
those typical students in the manner the Defendants did with Kevin.
63. On September 17, 2014, West Clermont officials informed Debbie House that if
Kevin behaved the same way again that Yes, if it happened again we would do the same thing
again because that was West Clermonts policy. West Clermont also informed Debbie I-louse
that she was fortunate that Kevin had not been tased and that the Union Township Police
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 14 of 20 PAGEID #: 14
Department did not have to follow West Clermonts and the State of Ohios ban on mechanical
and prone restraints. West Clermont officials asserted that the police were in charge and that
West Clermont had no responsibility for what occurred to Kevin. On September 30, 2014,
Defendant Robinson told Debbie House that Kevins Behavior Plan did not need any substantive
changes Because this plan worked and 1 did not want to get hit.
V. CAUSES OF ACTION
DENIAL OF PLAINTIFFS FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO BE FREE FROMUNREASONABLE SEIZURE AND EXCESSIVE FORCE42 U.S.C. 1983
64. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
65. The totality of circumstances described in this Complaint including Kevins
multiple disabilities, existing legal and policy proscriptions on mechanical and prone restraints,
officials ignoring the detailed plans for controlling Kevins predictable behavior, and the serious
foreseeable injuries to Kevin mandate the conclusion that Defendants Siekbert. Robinson, and
Flatlield acted unreasonably and without proper justification.
66. Defendants Siekbert, Robinson, and 1-latfield deprived Kevin of his Fourth
Amendment entitlements to be free from unreasonable seizure and free from excessive force.
DENIAL OF PLAINTIFFS FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT LIBERTY RIGHTS TO BEFREE FROM EXCESSIVE FORCE, FREE FROM UNREASONABLE RESTRICTIONSON BODILY INTEGRITY, AND DENIAL OF RIGHT TO PROPER CARE WHILE IN
GOVERNMENT CUSTODY42 U.S.C. 1983
67. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
68. Defendants Siekbert. Robinson, and Hatfield deprived Kevin of his Fourteenth
Amendment entitlement to be free from improper restrictions on his bodily integrity and free
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 15 of 20 PAGEID #: 15
from excessive force, and deprived Kevin of his right to proper care while in government
DENIAL OF PLAINTIFFS FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO EQUALPROTECTION OF THE LAW42 U.S.C. 1983
69. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
70. Upon information and belief, Defendants Siekbert, Robinson, and Hatfield have
not and do not leave non-disabled students handcuffed and prone for 30 minutes. Their
discriminatory conduct deprived Kevin of his 14th Amendment right to equal protection of the
DEFENDANT UNION TOWNSHIPS UNCONSTITUTIONAL FAILURE TO TRAIN42 U.S.C. 1983
71. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
72. Union Township knew that its policy and custom of failing to train its police
officers how to respond to students in school subject to Ohios and West Clermonts ban on
mechanical and prone restraints would proximately cause injury to students like Kevin.
73. Union Township knew that its policy and custom of failing to train its police
officers how to respond to students in school subject to Behavior Plans would proximately cause
injury to students like Kevin.
74. The need for proper training how to respond to students with disabilities in school
like Kevin is so obvious that Union Townships failure to do so deprived Kevin of his Fourth and
Fourteenth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable seizure and restraint, right to be free
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 16 of 20 PAGEID #: 16
from excessive force, right to be free from unreasonable restrictions on bodily integrity, and right
to receive proper care while in government custody.
DEFENDANT WEST CLERMONTS UNCONSTITUTIONAL FAILURE TO TRAIN42 U.S.C. 1983
75. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
76. West Clermont knew that its policy and custom of failing to train its officials how
to respond to students in school subject to Ohios and West Clermonts ban on mechanical and
prone restraints would proximately cause injury to students like Kevin.
77. West Clermont knew that its policy and custom of failing to train its officials how
to respond to students in school subject to Behavior Plans would proximately cause injury to
students like Kevin.
78. The need for proper training how to respond to students with disabilities in school
like Kevin is so obvious that West Clermonts failure to do so deprived Kevin of his Fourth and
Fourteenth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable seizure and restraint, right to be free
from excessive force, right to be free from unreasonable restrictions on bodily integrity, and right
to receive proper care while in government custody.
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT/SECTION 503 OF THE REHABILITATIONACT OF 1973
79. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
80. In violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12101. ci seq.
and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. 29 U.S.C. 794. West Clermont and Union
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 17 of 20 PAGEID #: 17
Township unlawfully discriminated against students with behavioral disabilities like Kevin and
failed to provide reasonable modifications to those students.
INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILTIES EDUCATION ACT
81. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
82. West Clermonts systemic refusal to comply with Kevins Behavior Plan deprived
Kevin of his entitlement to a free and appropriate public education under the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act. 20 U.S.C. 1400. et seq. and caused Kevin significant regression.
ASSAULT AND BATTTERY
83. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
84. Defendants Siekbert. Robinson, and Hatfield acted intentionally and recklessly
and each committed assault and battery against Kevin.
FALSE ARREST AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT
85. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
86. Defendants Siekbert. Robinson, and Hatfield acted intentionally and recklessly
and each falsely atTested and falsely imprisoned Kevin.
VI. REQUEST FOR RELIEF
Wherefore, Plaintiffs request that this Court:
1. Declare that the actions described herein violated Kevin Houses rights under the
Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Americans with
Disabilities Act. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Individuals with
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 18 of 20 PAGEID #: 18
Disabilities Education Act. Further declare that West Clermonts and Union Townships
systemic deprivations of Kevins rights and the rights of similarly situated students are unlawful.
2. Issue an order enjoining the Defendants from using mechanical restraints and
prone restraints on students like Kevin. enjoining the Defendants from ignoring the terms of
Behavior Plans for students like Kevin, and otherwise enjoin the Defendants from depriving
students like Kevin of their rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United
Stales Constitution, the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Ohio regulations and policy, and common
law. Further enjoin West Clermonts and Union Townships systemic violations of Kevins
rights and the prospective systemic violations of the rights of similarly situated students.
3. Award Plaintiff Kevin I-louse compensatory damages.
4. Award Plaintiff Kevin House compensatory education and reimbursement for
expenditures occasioned by West Clermonts failure to provide him a free and appropriate public
5. Award reasonable attorneys fees and costs.
6. Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
/s/ Richard GanulinRichard Ganulin. Esq. (0025642)Attorney at Law3662 Kendall AvenueCincinnati, Ohio 45208(513) 405-6696ranulin(1:mail.com
Attorney for Kevin House, by and through hisguardian, mother, and next friend Debbie LynnHouse
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 19 of 20 PAGEID #: 19
State ofbCount), k Uifl )
:uebbie Lynn House, guardian, mother, and next thend of Plaintiff Kevin House, beingduly sworn, says that the facmal allegations contained in this Complaint are tue to the best ofher knowledge.
Taken, sworn to and subscribed before me this L day of S pternber, 2015.
KAJTLYN R. 8ROpjyPUBLICKentuc*y State At LaigeMy Commission Exptrcs 1O3/2o1s
F / 7Not Public
Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 20 of 20 PAGEID #: 20