Simmons v. City of Mount Vernon

Background

Terri Simmons, proceeding without a lawyer and without prepaying filing fees, asserted claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Her claims concerned the alleged suspension of her son, identified as “P.E.,” from Fox Meadow Middle School/High School; the alleged failure of the Putnam/Northern Westchester Board of Cooperative Educational Services and the Mount Vernon City School District to ensure her participation in disciplinary hearings; and the alleged failure to provide educational services or an alternative school placement.

The court had previously granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1), which concerns subject-matter jurisdiction, but allowed Simmons to file another complaint addressing whether she had exhausted the administrative procedures required by the special-education law or whether exhaustion was excused. Simmons then filed a second amended complaint adding eight defendants: an unidentified school-district superintendent; Felicia Gaon; Michele D. Fret; Shelley Fleischmann; the City of Mount Vernon; Putnam County; the New York State Department of Education; and the New York State Board of Regents.

Rulings on Newly Named Defendants

The court dismissed all claims against the City of Mount Vernon and Putnam County. It found that the complaint did not allege that either municipality played a substantive role in the events. The court also dismissed all claims against the New York State Department of Education and the New York State Board of Regents because the complaint contained only a bare allegation that Simmons had written letters seeking assistance and services, without alleging what either state defendant did in response.

The court directed service through the U.S. Marshals Service on Gaon, Fret, and Fleischmann. It also ordered the school district to identify the unnamed superintendent and provide the address where that defendant could be served. The court stated that these allegations were sufficient to permit service, but expressly did not decide whether Simmons could ultimately show that she was entitled to relief against those defendants.

The court likewise did not decide whether Simmons’s allegations about an administrative complaint, a settlement with the school district, or other events resolved the exhaustion problems identified in the earlier dismissal order.

Effect of the Order

The claims against the school district, the Putnam/Northern Westchester Board of Cooperative Educational Services, Nicole Murphy, and Penny Beckman were to proceed in the regular course. Those previously named defendants were ordered to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the second amended complaint by May 20, 2022. The clerk was directed to terminate the four dismissed defendants from the action.

The court certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti signed the order on April 29, 2022.

Classification

This is a procedural order. The court dismissed claims based on inadequate pleading and managed service and identification of defendants; it did not decide the underlying disability, education, or civil-rights claims on their merits.