OT fascinating case
Gary Collard
http://www.dolanmedia.com/view.cfm?recID=552049
Subject: Williamsburg County schools settle with students over same-race
discrimination
Pub: South Carolina Lawyers Weekly
Author: Fred Horlbeck
Category:
Sub-Category:
Issue Date: 12/28/2009 Word Count: 80
Williamsburg County schools settle with students over same-race
discrimination
by Fred Horlbeck
Dolan Media Newswires
COLUMBIA, SC -- Two Williamsburg County students and members of
their family have reached a $150,000 settlement in what may be the first
Title VI lawsuit based on claims of intra-racial discrimination in South
Carolina public schools.
Lawrence "Larry" Kobrovsky, a Charleston attorney who focuses his
practice on constitutional law and school issues, said the parties
settled after a female student's claims of sexual and racial harassment
at a Salters school went to trial in U.S. District Court in Florence.
The suit was one of two against the Williamsburg County School
District and school officials. The other suit, filed on behalf of the
student's uncle, was dismissed.
Both students were members of an African-American family that
shared a home in rural Williamsburg County. Both attended public schools
at the time of the alleged harassment.
The trial lasted two days, but the case never went to the jury.
Instead, the trial ended after the uncle testified. The next day, a
settlement offer was on the table, Kobrovsky said.
"He gives a pretty raw and kind of unvarnished version of what it's
like to live in rural Williamsburg County and how the races interact and
are separate, which is kind of a world apart. People who aren't living
there don't see that," Kobrovsky said.
The two students each received $50,000, and two family members who
filed the suits on their behalf received $25,000 apiece, according to
Kobrovsky. The settlements were reported to South Carolina Lawyers
Weekly last week.
The cases were Gasque, et al. v. Williamsburg County School
District et al., Civil Action No. 4:07-CV-01757-RBH; and Gasque v.
Williamsburg County School District, et al., Civil Action No.
4:07-CV-1765-RBH.
"What made this unique is that this, as far as I know, is the only
Title VI case ever brought in federal court when it's an intra-racial
hostile environment," Kobrovsky said.
Title VI prohibits allowing a racially hostile educational
environment in schools and programs receiving federal financial
assistance and provides for a private cause of action for violations.
The younger student initially asserted nine causes of action, but
only the Title VI claim went to trial.
She claimed she suffered emotional trauma because she was subjected
to racial and sexual slurs at an elementary school in Salters during
September and November 2006. She had to receive home instruction for the
rest of the school year, according to an amended complaint.
Despite complaints, school administrative staff and district
officials allowed the abuse to "escalate to the point where [she] was
physically threatened, assaulted and battered," the suit alleged.
The suit also claimed that a school official and a district
official, either individually or together, "retaliated" against the
student by causing the state Department of Social Services to launch an
abuse-and-neglect investigation of the plaintiffs and their household.
The complaint said DSS determined the investigation, which included a
strip search of the student, was unfounded.
In their answer, the defendants said DSS had investigated. But they
denied causing the investigation and denied the other claims against them.
A lawyer for the defendants, Thomas K. Barlow, did not return a
phone call seeking comment prior to publication.
'Acting white'
Proving intra-racial discrimination was a matter of portraying the
environment cultural and racial at the students' respective schools,
Kobrovsky said.
Both students were African-American, and so was most of the
elementary school's student body, according to Kobrovsky. Most students
were also black at the high school that her uncle attended.
The problem was the culture of rural Williamsburg County, he said.
"You have a culture where to act like you want to do well in school
is considered acting white. And that is part of why we're saying that it
was racial, even though the students were all of the same race because
they weren't acting how the others thought they should be acting as
members of that race," Kobrovsky said.
The uncle testified that racial separation in the county generally
meant white students attended private schools while black students
attended public schools.
At the public schools, he said, fitting in meant not being what his
family was: "churchy," "upright" and wanting education, as another
witness put it, according to a trial transcript.
"You see, it's a crime to act white, or it's a crime to be white,"
the uncle testified.
Harassment, he testified, made him feel that "we are just dumb,
we're just not people, we're undergraded, we're degraded, and we're not
even supposed to be in this world."
That testimony was the key to the settlement, Kobrovsky said.
"I think the most compelling part was his, and that's, frankly, why
it's settled after he testified," Kobrovsky said.
Settlement Report
Brief statement of the claim: The plaintiffs claimed retaliation by
public school district against parents and students for complaining
about a racially hostile educational environment, in violation of Sect.
601 of Title VI of Chapter 21 of Title 42 of the Civil Rights Act,
subchapter V, which prohibits the allowance of a racially hostile
educational environment in schools and programs receiving federal
financial assistance and provides for a private cause of action for such
violations. The U.S. Department of Education, pursuant to 59 Fed. Reg.
at 11449, defines a racially hostile educational environment as "one in
which racial harassment is severe, pervasive or persistent so as to
interfere with or limit the ability of an individual to participate in
or benefit from the activities or privileges provided by the recipient";
42 USC Sect. 1983 claims against superintendent and school principal;
defamation, invasion of privacy, abuse of process.
Principal injuries: Physical illness, emotional distress and
humiliation
Tried or settled: Settlement of $150,000 after second day of trial
County and court where tried or settled: U.S. District Court for
the District of South Carolina Florence Division
Case names and numbers: Gasque, et al. v. Williamsburg County
School District et al., Civil Action No. 4:07-CV-01757-RBH; and Gasque
v. Williamsburg County School District, et al., Civil Action No.
4:07-CV-1765-RBH.
Date concluded: Oct. 27, 2009
Name of judge: U.S. District Judge Robert Bryan Harwell
Amount: $150,000 for all claims
Insurance carrier: Williamsburg County School District,
self-insured, and State Insurance Revenue Fund
Expert witnesses: None
Attorney for plaintiffs: Lawrence C. Kobrovsky (Charleston) for
constitutional law claims and Stephen F. DeAntonio, of DeAntonio Law
Firm (Charleston), for defamation and invasion of privacy claims.
--
Gary Collard
SABR-L Moderator
gmcollard at yahoo dot com
http://twitter.com/LakerGMC
http://sarcastipundit.blogspot.com/
"You can't even dignify this squalid racket as bribery: If I try
to buy a cop, I have to use my own money. But, when Harry Reid
buys a senator, he uses my money, too." -- Mark Steyn