Doe v. Bd. of Educ. of Prince George's Cnty.

644 F.Supp.3d 149

Jane DOES 1-22, Plaintiffs, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY,Dr. Monica Goldson, in her official capacity,Rex Barrett, individually and in his official capacity,Cesar Pacheco, individually and in his official capacity,Timothy Gover, individually and in his official capacity,and Dr. Wesley Watts, Jr., individually and in his official capacity, Defendants.

Civil Action No. TDC-19-2580

United States District Court, D. Maryland

Signed December 6, 2022

Bruce Allen Johnson, Jr., Bruce A. Johnson Jr. LLC, Bowie, MD, Erick R. Tyrone, The Tyrone Law Group LLC, Largo, MD, for Plaintiffs.

Gregory K. Wells, Shadoan Michael and Wells LLP, Rockville, MD, for Defendants Dr. Monica Goldson, Rex Barrett, Cesar Pacheco, Dr. W. Wesley Watts, Jr.

Andrew James Hall, Gregory K. Wells, Shadoan Michael and Wells LLP, Rockville, MD, for Defendants Prince George's County Public Schools, Timothy Gover.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

THEODORE D. CHUANG, United States District Judge

Plaintiffs Jane Does 1-22, former students at Charles Herbert Flowers High School ("Flowers High School"), a public high school within the Prince George's County Public Schools ("PGCPS") in Prince George's County, Maryland, have filed this civil action alleging that they were improperly subjected to video recording at school without their knowledge or consent while they were dressing for Pom and Dance Team activities. Plaintiffs allege violations of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 ("Title IX"), 20 U.S.C. § 1681 (2018), the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Article 24 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights, as well as various state law tort claims. Defendant Board of Education of Prince George's County ("the BOE") has filed an Answer to the Amended Complaint. The remaining defendants, Dr. Monica Goldson, Rex Barrett, Cesar Pacheco, Timothy Glover, and Dr. Wesley Watts, Jr. (collectively, the "Individual Defendants") have filed a Motion to Dismiss, which is fully briefed. Having reviewed the submitted materials, the Court finds that no hearing is necessary. See D. Md. Local R. 105.6. For the reasons set forth below, the Motion will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.

BACKGROUND

The allegations in the Amended Complaint, which the Court must accept as true for purposes of the pending Motion, include the following facts.

During both the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 school years, Plaintiffs were students at Flowers High School and were members of the school-sanctioned and funded Flowers High School Pom and Dance Team ("the Pom and Dance Team"). During this time period, Plaintiffs were minor children between the ages of 14 and 17. The faculty co-sponsor of the Pom and Dance Team was Donna Bussey, the secretary to the principal of Flowers High School. As the faculty co-sponsor, Bussey was responsible for the well-being, whereabouts, and safety of the Pom and Dance Team members. Typically, Bussey met with the team in the principal's office before performances and competitions. After these meetings, team members changed out of their school clothes and into their dance uniforms in the principal's office before walking together to the location of the performance. The Pom and Dance Team changed into their dance uniforms in the principal's office because both of the school's locker rooms were typically in use by other athletic teams, it was close enough to Bussey that she could provide supervision, it was large enough to accommodate the entire team, and it was believed to be a safe and private space.

On or about July 29, 2016, Defendant Rex Barrett, the Deputy Director of the PGCPS Department of Security Services; Defendant Cesar Pacheco, the PGCPS Assistant Director of Security Services; and Defendant Captain Timothy Gover, the PGCPS Deputy Director for Safety and Security Services, authorized and ordered the installation of a hidden camera in the Flowers High School principal's office. The hidden camera was installed by a PGCPS employee at the direction of Defendant Dr. Wesley Watts, Jr., the PGCPS Chief Information and Technology Officer. The camera was disguised as a smoke detector. There were no signs or notices placed in or near the principal's office to notify or warn individuals that they would be subject to video recording when they were in the principal's office.

At the time of installation, the PGCPS employee labeled the hidden camera's IP address as "Friendly" to conceal the identity of the camera in the event that it was discovered. Am. Compl. ¶ 36, ECF No. 37. Furthermore, despite its placement in the principal's office, the video feed for the hidden camera was intentionally mislabeled within the school security system as "Main Lobby." Id. ¶ 42. Because the hidden camera was connected to the school security system, there was live transmission of the video feed and also automatic recording of the contents of the video feed. The hidden camera's video footage could be accessed by anyone using or viewing the school security system, both onsite and offsite.

On September 7, 2016, Plaintiffs met with Bussey in the principal's office before the team's first performance of the year and then remained in the office as they changed out of their school clothes and into their dance uniforms. In doing so, Plaintiffs were recorded on the hidden camera in "various stages of undress that exposed their underwear as well as their breasts." Id. ¶ 39. Over the course of the 2016-2017 school year, Plaintiffs were recorded in various stages of undress on at least 28 additional occasions. They were similarly recorded at various times throughout the 2017-2018 school year. These recordings were all made without the knowledge or consent of Plaintiffs or their parents or guardians. Throughout this time period, neither Bussey nor other Flowers High School staff were made aware of the existence of the hidden camera.

On or about April 13, 2018, an assistant principal at Flowers High School discovered the video feed connected to the hidden camera. The assistant principal immediately reported the hidden camera to the head principal and the resident principal. Upon further investigation, the principals found that almost two years of video footage from the hidden camera remained stored, even though video footage from other cameras at the school was automatically deleted after a 30-day period. The same day, Gover instructed a technician to go to Flowers High School, remove the hidden camera, and collect the stored recordings. Initially, the head principal denied the technician access to the camera until additional information could be obtained about how and why the camera was installed.

On April 16, 2018, two principals from Flowers High School, three employees from the PGCPS Department of Information and Technology, and three members of the Prince George's County Police Department ("PGCPD") attended a meeting to discuss the hidden camera. After the meeting, the camera and recorder were removed and turned over to the PGCPD for further investigation. The same day, PGCPS held a press conference at which it revealed that the hidden camera had been found. Flowers High School students and parents were then notified. Plaintiffs have alleged that Defendants, as well as PGCPS security personnel assigned to Flowers High School, had actual knowledge that the hidden camera in the principal's office was recording Plaintiffs and their fellow Pom and Dance Team members in various stages of undress, and that the video feed was "accessible to anyone accessing or using" the school's security system, whether on school grounds or not, but that despite this knowledge, Defendants "failed to take any corrective measures" to remove the hidden camera and the video feed or to protect these underaged, female students from being recorded. Id. ¶ 55, 58. Plaintiffs also contend that the only reason for recording them in various stages of undress was a sexual motivation.

Upon learning about the hidden camera, Plaintiffs became "incredibly anxious" about what recordings existed and who had seen them. Id. ¶ 70. Plaintiffs feel "objectified" and "violated on a sexual level" because they were apparently watched by school officials while they were undressed. Id. ¶ 70. Plaintiffs also assert that they have suffered emotional and psychological trauma, including "great mental anguish and distress," from the potential that there are copies of the recordings that could be released to the public and thus cause them reputational harm. Id. ¶ 72. Plaintiffs continue to suffer from anxiety, stress, nightmares, difficulty in social interactions, embarrassment, and reputational damage. As a result, some of Plaintiffs have sought mental health counseling from sexual assault services.

I. Procedural History

In the now operative Amended Complaint, filed on April 20, 2022, Plaintiffs named as Defendants (1) Prince George's County ("the County"); (2) the BOE (originally identified in the pleading as PGCPS); and (3) the Individual Defendants in both their official and individual capacities. The Amended Complaint alleged the following causes of action, in the following numbered counts, against all Defendants except as otherwise specified: (1) a violation of Title IX against the BOE, Barrett, Pacheco, Gover, and Watts; (2) a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging violations of the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution against the BOE, Barrett, Pacheco, Gover, and Watts; (3) a § 1983 claim based on supervisory liability against the County; (4) a § 1983 claim based on municipal liability against the County; (5) a violation of the Fourth Amendment; (6) a violation of Article 24 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights; (7) invasion of privacy or intrusion upon seclusion; (8) gross negligence; (9) negligent supervision against the County and the BOE; (10) respondeat superior against the County and the BOE; and (11) intentional infliction of emotional...