Civil Rights

A federal judge is allowing one claim of several in a lawsuit stemming from a 2018 incident involving members of the Williamsport Area High School baseball team to proceed, while others were returned to the plaintiff to potentially be refiled.

U.S. Middle District Judge Matthew W. Brann on Thursday gave the anonymous plaintiff until May 11 to file an amended complaint on most of them, according to John Beauge of PennLive.com.

According to PennLive, in his analysis of the plaintiff’s claims Brann found that the plaintiff agreed Title IX is not the appropriate approach to sue individual school employees, dismissing those claims against head principal Brandon Pardoe, athletic director Sean McCann, Coach Ryan Miller and district solicitor Fred Holland. The civil rights, equal protection and civil rights conspiracy claims and negligence claims against Holland and then-chief county detective William Weber were legally insufficient. Brann made the same finding as to state law claims.

As to the plaintiff’s claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, PennLive reported that Brann found he failed to allege any intentional act on the part of any defendant that led to him being assaulted. Brann also found the defendants are entitled to immunity because the plaintiff’s allegations fail to meet exceptions to that law.

The plaintiff alleges he was the victim of an incident of hazing or assault in March 2018 at a resort in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, during the baseball team’s trip for a tournament. Weber and the other defendants are accused in the lawsuit of having covered the incident up, intentionally withholding information, such as a video of the assault, from the Myrtle Beach Police Department.

He claimed in his complaint he was subjected to a hostile educational environment and sexual harassment, PennLive.com reported, and is accusing the school district of first failing to guard against the sexual abuse of a minor and then acting to cover it up.

The single claim that survived defense motions to dismiss was one brought under Title IX against the Williamsport Area School District.

The other defendants and their positions in 2018 are Pardoe, then-assistant principal Roger Freed (who himself is facing charges for sex crimes against a minor), McCann, Miller, Holland, Lycoming County and Weber.

Among other allegations by the plaintiff referenced in the judge’s opinion, several members of the team used discriminatory slurs to refer to the plaintiff before he was assaulted by one member of the team, with others holding the plaintiff down. Another student allegedly captured the assaults on video.

The plaintiff alleges Pardoe, Miller and McCann later learned of the videos and instructed the students to delete any records of them while the team was still in Myrtle Beach, but students had already shared the videos on social media and continued to do so once the team returned to Williamsport.

In May 2018, according to PennLive’s reporting on the judge’s opinion, a report was made to Lycoming County Children and Youth Services that it forwarded to Weber, who in turn notified Pardoe. Weber allegedly said he would make referrals to law enforcement in Myrtle Beach if he deemed it necessary but then, after allegedly obtaining one of the videos of the assault, did not inform the district attorney’s office of the incident.

The plaintiff’s family allegedly met Pardoe, Weber and Freed, at which time the teen described what happened to him and identified himself in the video. Weber, according to PennLive and the judge’s opinion, concluded the incident was an incident of hazing or bullying that “the school properly handled” and there was accordingly “no referral to be made.”

The plaintiff also claims Pardoe asked the alleged assailant’s mother not to communicate with anyone about the incident and told her that the case would not be advancing. Pardoe suggested Holland be present for any meetings with the assailant as his family had engaged an attorney who threatened a civil action against the school if the student was scapegoated as solely responsible.

Brann’s order that accompanies the opinion lists the claims on which an amended complaint may be filed.