Alvoid v. Sch. Dist. of Escambia Cnty.

582 F.Supp.3d 1140

Richard ALVOID, AS father and NEXT FRIEND, A.R.A, a minor, Plaintiff,

v.The SCHOOL DISTRICT OF ESCAMBIA COUNTY; Traci Ursrey, principal of Workman Middle School, in her individual capacity; City of Pensacola; and Gregory S. Gordon and David Huhn of the Pensacola Police Department in their individual capacities, Defendants.

CASE NO. 3:20-cv-5533-MCR-HTC

United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Pensacola Division.

Signed January 7, 2021

Eric Duane Stevenson, Pensacola, FL, for Plaintiff.

Joseph L. Hammons, Hammons Law Firm, Pensacola, FL, for Defendants Escambia County School District, Traci Ursrey.

Matthew Joseph Carson, Michael Patrick Spellman, Sniffen & Spellman PA, Tallahassee, FL, for Defendants Gregory S. Gordon, David Huhn.

Matthew Joseph Carson, Sniffen & Spellman PA, Tallahassee, FL, for Defendant City of Pensacola.

ORDER

M. CASEY RODGERS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Before the Court are Defendants’ motions to dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, ECF Nos. 9¹ and 23. On full consideration, the Court finds the motions are due to be granted.

I. Legal Standard

The Court accepts the allegations in the Amended Complaint as true and construes them in the light most favorable to Plaintiff. See Hunt v. Amico Props., L.P. , 814 F.3d 1213, 1221 (11th Cir. 2016). "To withstand a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must include ‘enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’ " Id. (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) ). The Court limits its "consideration to the well-pleaded factual allegations, documents central to or referenced in the complaint, and matters judicially noticed." LaGrasta v. First Union Sec., Inc. , 358 F.3d 840, 845 (11th Cir. 2004).

"A ‘claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.’ " Hunt , 814 F.3d at 1221 (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal , 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) ). "Plaintiff[s’] allegations must amount to ‘more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.’ " Id. (quoting Twombly , 550 U.S. at 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955 ). When a plaintiff has "[n]ot nudged [his] claims across the line from conceivable to plausible, [his] complaint must be dismissed." Twombly , 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955.

II. Background

Plaintiff Richard Alvoid brings this lawsuit on behalf of his minor son, A.R.A. In February 2018, A.R.A. was a student enrolled in the eighth grade at J.H. Workman Middle School, a public school in Pensacola, Florida (the "School"). On or about February 13, 2018, A.R.A. posted the following meme to his personal Instagram account:

?

See ECF No. 9-1 ("the meme"). The meme shows a picture of an individual attaching a suppressor to a handgun with the caption "When youre shooting up the school and youre about to enter the library." A.R.A. was not on School property when he posted the meme. See Am. Compl. [ECF No. 15] ¶¶ 56, 61.

On February 13, one of A.R.A.’s classmates saw the meme while browsing A.R.A.’s Instagram account in the School's cafeteria. The classmate shared the meme with other students sitting at the cafeteria table. The meme "was later generally considered to be dark humor" by the students. By tragic coincidence, the following day, seventeen people were killed, and seventeen others were injured by a gunman at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida (the "Parkland Shooting").

On February 16, a parent of one of A.R.A's classmates anonymously reported A.R.A.’s posting of the meme to the School's guidance counselor. The guidance counselor relayed the anonymous parent's report to the School's principal, Defendant Ursrey ("Principal Ursrey"). Principal Ursrey contacted a representative of Defendant Escambia County School District (the "School Board") for advice and direction regarding the report. The School Board's representative instructed Principal Ursrey to have A.R.A. arrested for posting the meme.

Principal Ursrey reported A.R.A.’s posting of the meme to the School's resource officer, Defendant Gordon ("Officer Gordon").² Officer Gordon was not at the School when he received Principal Ursrey's report. Consequently, Principal Ursrey held the end-of-class bell and placed the School on lockdown, restricting all students’ movements, until Officer Gordon arrived on campus.

Officer Gordon arrived at the School accompanied by Defendant Huhn ("Officer Huhn"), an officer with the Pensacola Police Department. Without first performing a name-check on the Instagram profile to confirm that A.R.A. was the individual who had posted the meme, Officer Gordon and Officer Huhn accompanied Principal Ursrey to the classroom where A.R.A. was located. Principal Ursrey instructed A.R.A. to step out of the classroom and into the hallway. When A.R.A. complied and stepped into the hallway, Officer Gordon and Officer Huhn detained him, shoved him against the wall, patted him down, searched his bookbag, handcuffed him, and transported him to Officer Gordon's office at the School.

Officer Gordon read A.R.A. his Miranda rights and told A.R.A. he was being detained because he posted the meme to his Instagram account. When Officer Gordon and Officer Huhn asked A.R.A. why he posted the meme, A.R.A. stated something to the effect that he "was trying to start a meme account." Officer Gordon and Officer Huhn arrested A.R.A. for "Conspire to Disrupt Education Process," a felony under § 877.13(1)(d), Florida Statutes.³

The following day, a member of the Pensacola Police Department stated during a press conference that, "Let me emphasize that at no time was Workman Middle School or any school in danger of violence."

On March 1, the Escambia County School District Superintendent advised that he intended to recommend to the School Board that A.R.A. be subjected to disciplinary reassignment to an alternative school for the remainder of the 2017–2018 school year. On March 11, A.R.A. moved to Italy to live with Plaintiff to avoid enrollment in a school "attended by delinquent classmates." Nonetheless, on April 17, the School Board adopted the Superintendent's recommendation to subject A.R.A. to disciplinary reassignment.

A.R.A.’s criminal proceeding was scheduled for a bench trial on August 23. On the morning of trial, the State of Florida amended the Information against A.R.A. and reduced the criminal charge against A.R.A. to a misdemeanor under § 871.01, Florida Statutes.⁴ A.R.A. was acquitted after a one-day trial.

Plaintiff brings claims against Officer Gordon, Officer Huhn, the City of Pensacola (the "City"), Principal Ursrey, and the School Board arising from A.R.A.’s arrest and disciplinary reassignment. Specifically, Plaintiff raises claims for false arrest under Florida law against Officer Gordon (Count I) and Officer Huhn (Count II), a claim for battery under Florida law against Officer Gordon (Count III), claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for violations of A.R.A.’s Fourth Amendment rights against Officer Gordon (Count IV) and Officer Huhn (Count V), and a § 1983 claim against the City for violations of A.R.A.’s rights under the First and Fourth Amendments (Count VI). Additionally, Plaintiff raises § 1983 claims for violations of A.R.A.’s First and Fourth Amendment rights against Principal Ursrey (Counts VII–VIII) and the School Board (Count IX). Defendants move to dismiss the Amended Complaint in its entirety based on qualified and statutory immunity, as well as failure to state a claim.

III. Discussion

A. Counts I & II – False Arrest

To state a claim for false arrest under Florida law, a plaintiff must allege three elements: "(1) an unlawful detention and deprivation of liberty against the plaintiff's will; (2) an unreasonable detention which is not warranted by the circumstances and (3) an intentional detention." Coipel v. Carpenter , No. 16-20458, 2017 WL 3432299, at *4 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 9, 2017) (citation omitted). "Probable cause serves as an affirmative defense to a claim for false arrest." Id. ; see Davis v. City of Apopka , 734 F. App'x 616, 621 (11th Cir. 2018). "Probable cause to arrest exists ‘when the facts and circumstances within the officer's knowledge, of which he or she had reasonably trustworthy information, would cause a prudent person to believe, under the circumstances shown, that the suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit an offense.’ " Davis , 734 F. App'x at 621 (citation omitted). "In order for probable cause to exist, ‘an arrest must be objectively reasonable based on the totality of the circumstances.’ " Id. (citation omitted).

Officer Gordon and Officer Huhn move to dismiss Plaintiff's false arrest claims, arguing that (1) A.R.A.’s arrest was supported by probable cause and (2) the Officers are entitled to statutory immunity pursuant to section 768.28(9)(a), Florida Statutes. In response, Plaintiff argues that (1) the Officers lacked probable cause to arrest A.R.A., (2) section 768.28(9)(A) does not apply to a claim for false arrest, and (3) even if section 768.28(9)(a) applied, the Officers would not be entitled to statutory immunity because they arrested A.R.A. "without proper investigation or probable cause." Plaintiff's arguments are unavailing.

Based only on the facts presented in the Amended Complaint, the Court concludes that Officer Gordon and Officer Huhn had probable cause to arrest A.R.A. The Officers, acting in the immediate aftermath of the Parkland Shooting, determined A.R.A. was likely the individual who had posted the meme based on the information provided by Principal Ursrey. See City of Clearwater v. Williamson , 938 So. 2d 985, 991 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) ("[T]he receipt of information from someone who it seems reasonable to believe is telling the truth is adequate." (citation omitted)). It was reasonable for...