Simmons v. City of Mount Vernon

Background

Terri Simmons, proceeding without a lawyer and without paying filing fees, brought the action on behalf of her son, identified as “P.E.” The caption lists Putnam/Northern Westchester Board of Cooperative Educational Services, Mount Vernon City School District, Nicole Murphy, and Penny Beckman as defendants. The opinion states that the City of Mount Vernon and County of Putnam were not served because the complaint did not indicate they were proper defendants.

Simmons alleged that P.E., who was sixteen and attending Fox Meadow Middle School/High School, had been classified as disabled since birth. She alleged that Beckman, a psychologist, questioned P.E. on November 9, 2016, shared information with Murphy, and that P.E. was then suspended. She claimed that defendants did not provide required notice or hearings, did not follow educational standards for disabled students, and did not provide school activities or home tutoring.

The complaint invoked 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and what it called the No Child Left Behind Act. The opinion also noted handwritten references to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, but declined to address those theories because they were not plausibly alleged. The defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).

Representation of P.E.

The court held that a parent who is not a lawyer cannot represent a minor child in federal court. It determined that Simmons’s first, second, third, and fifth causes of action concerned only P.E.’s rights, including claims for race and disability discrimination under § 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the No Child Left Behind Act. The court also determined that the tutoring and educational-services claim in Count Four concerned P.E.’s rights rather than an independent claim by Simmons.

The court additionally stated that claims asserted under the No Child Left Behind Act had to be dismissed because that law does not provide a private right of action. It concluded that Simmons’s claims on behalf of P.E. had to be dismissed without prejudice because she was not an attorney. The opinion did not decide the underlying discrimination or educational-rights allegations.

Counsel and Stay Requests

Simmons requested volunteer counsel in her opposition to the dismissal motion. The court denied that request without prejudice, finding that the application was not fully developed and that Simmons had not provided a sufficient basis for appointment at that time. The court also explained that P.E. was then legally an adult under New York law. If Simmons sought to proceed for P.E. because of alleged incompetency, she would need to apply to be appointed as a guardian ad litem, and the court would need to address whether such an appointment was warranted.

The court separately denied without prejudice Simmons’s request to stay the proceedings because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The request had first been made in opposition to the dismissal motion, and the court found that Simmons had provided no basis for it.

Leave to Amend and Disposition

The court granted Simmons leave to file an amended complaint. She could assert claims on her own behalf, which she could litigate without a lawyer, or pursue claims for P.E. only if she applied to be appointed guardian ad litem and obtained counsel for those claims. The amended complaint had to replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint and address the deficiencies identified in the opinion.

The court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss. It also granted leave to amend subject to the stated conditions. Simmons had to file an amended complaint, or request more time, by December 9, 2020; otherwise, the court said it might deem the case abandoned and enter judgment dismissing it. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free appeal status for that purpose.