Pack v. Middlebury Cmty. Sch.

458 F.Supp.3d 1020

Kevin PACK, Plaintiff,

v.MIDDLEBURY COMMUNITY SCHOOLS et al., Defendants.

CAUSE NO. 3:18-CV-00924 DRL-MGG

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, South Bend Division.

Signed April 30, 2020

James E. Ayers, Wernle Ristine & Ayers LPC, Crawfordsville, IN, for Plaintiff.

Amy Stewart Johnson, Anthony W. Overholt, Robert B. Thornburg, Frost Brown Todd LLC, Indianapolis, IN, for Defendants.

OPINION & ORDER

Damon R. Leichty Judge After Middlebury Community Schools (MCS) terminated Kevin Pack's employment, the school posted on its website a press release announcing his termination. He sued, alleging he was fired for his atheist beliefs. The two parties resolved the case through a settlement agreement containing a confidentiality and non-disparagement clause.

Thence began his covert operation: he recruited acquaintances to call MCS incognito, disguised as prospective employers, to obtain information from the school about him. His mission proved possible. These acquaintances elicited responses from MCS that he claims violated the settlement agreement. He says MCS added insult to injury by not removing the press release from its website and by submitting an affidavit in Mr. Pack's defamation lawsuit against The Elkhart Truth. He claims these actions violated the non-disparagement obligations in the settlement agreement.

MCS views the case as unworthy of a trial and requests summary judgment. Its request has led to a whole host of other motions, including reciprocal motions to strike, a motion for leave to supplement briefing, and now even a motion for a hearing because MCS and its retired employees continue to receive calls from Mr. Pack that they consider intimidating and harassing. The court now grants summary judgment for MCS, addressing these other matters in consequence.

BACKGROUND

Middlebury Community Schools is a public school corporation located in Middlebury, Elkhart County, Indiana. Its high school is Northridge High School. Jane Allen has served as MCS's superintendent since July 1, 2012.

In August 2013, Kevin Pack began teaching German at Northridge High School on a probationary contract. Shortly thereafter, Superintendent Allen began receiving complaints about him from students, parents, and faculty. MCS investigated these claims and issued a "Notice of Preliminary Decision of Immediate Cancellation of Contract" to Mr. Pack. Four days later, on February 28, 2014, Superintendent Allen recommended his termination to MCS's board.

About a month later, the school board held a hearing and decided to terminate Mr. Pack's employment. Its decision was explained through more than seventy findings of fact (though not presumed true for purposes of this motion today). The school board authorized a press release to explain its decision, then posted it on MCS's website in April 2014. The press release stated, among other things, that Mr. Pack was "a poor teacher whose overall performance regressed throughout the school year and showed no potential for improvement." ECF 40-5.

In January 2015, Mr. Pack initiated a discrimination lawsuit against MCS alleging that he was fired because he was an atheist. A reporter from The Elkhart Truth began investigating the story and interviewed both Mr. Pack and Superintendent Allen. This culminated in an article entitled "Fired Northridge teacher, an atheist, sues Middlebury Community Schools for religious discrimination," which was published in The Elkhart Truth.

In November 2016 (two years after Mr. Pack filed his discrimination lawsuit against MCS), the two parties entered into a settlement agreement. The agreement contained a confidentiality and non-disparagement provision:

MCS agrees that it will not make any public representations concerning [Mr. Pack] and in the event that it receives any inquiries from prospective employers of [Mr. Pack], the agents and/or employees of MCS will provide only [his] positions held and dates of employment, without other information or comment....

The parties further agree that neither they nor their representatives will disparage the other party. Disparage as used herein shall mean any communication, verbal or written, of false or defamatory information or the communication of information with reckless disregard to its truth or falsity. [MCS] agrees that it shall not make any statements, either internally or externally, that reflect adversely on Mr. Pack's job performance, and [he] agrees that he will not make any representations that disparage, demean, or impugn MCS, including without limitation any statements impugning the personal or professional character of any director, officer, or employee for MCS, nor will [Mr. Pack] encourage or assist others to make any such statements or representations. Each party shall refrain from all conduct, verbal or otherwise, which would damage or impair in any way the others’ reputation, goodwill, services, or standing in the community through any medium whether written, tangible, electronic, computerized, verbal, or any other form including the internet, e-mail, or other modalities.

ECF 40-8 ¶¶ 6(B), (C).

Shortly after the settlement agreement was consummated, Mr. Pack filed a defamation lawsuit against the owner of The Elkhart Truth for its article. Superintendent Allen submitted an affidavit in the case when the newspaper moved to dismiss it. ECF 40-10.

In June 2018, Mr. Pack asked two acquaintances, Lawton Dickens and Sidney Schneider, to call MCS and pose as potential employers. No matter its deception—they lied in several respects rather than just paltered—Mr. Pack wanted to know what was being said about him to potential employers because he was not getting other job offers. On three occasions, Mr. Dickens spoke to MCS on the phone posing as a prospective employer and inquiring into Mr. Pack's performance at the school. ECF 40-3 at 125-29 (first call); id. at 141-45 (second call); id. at 149-51 (third call). In one such call, Superintendent Allen said that Mr. Pack had been "terminated by the school board" and that his termination was "a matter of public record." Id. at 126-27; see also ECF 51-2 (consistent transcript). In a call with Mr. Schneider, Superintendent Allen said "he was terminated" and "for cause." ECF 51-3.

In November 2018, Mr. Pack filed this action alleging MCS breached the non-disparagement provision in the settlement agreement. His claims stem from three events: (1) when Superintendent Allen told Mr. Dickens over the phone that Mr. Pack was terminated, (2) when MCS left the April 2014 press release on its website after the settlement agreement, and (3) when Superintendent Allen submitted an affidavit to the state court during Mr. Pack's defamation lawsuit against The Elkhart Truth. MCS has moved for summary judgment on all claims.

STANDARD

Summary judgment is warranted when "the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). The non-moving party must present the court with evidence on which a reasonable jury could rely to find in his favor. Goodman v. Nat'l Sec. Agency, Inc. , 621 F.3d 651, 654 (7th Cir. 2010). The court must deny a summary judgment motion when there is admissible evidence that creates a genuine issue of material fact—a triable issue. Luster v. Ill. Dept. of Corrs. , 652 F.3d 726, 731 (7th Cir. 2011).

The court "is not to sift through the evidence, pondering the nuances and inconsistencies, and decide whom to believe." Waldridge v. Am. Hoechst Corp. , 24 F.3d 918, 920 (7th Cir. 1994). Instead, the "court has one task and one task only: to decide, based on the evidence of record, whether there is any material dispute of fact that requires a trial." Id. The court must construe all facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, view all reasonable inferences in that party's favor, Bellaver v. Quanex Corp. , 200 F.3d 485, 491-92 (7th Cir. 2000), and avoid "the temptation to decide which party's version of the facts is more likely true." Payne v. Pauley , 337 F.3d 767, 770 (7th Cir. 2003).

Indiana law applies here. A federal court sitting in diversity applies the substantive law of the forum state. Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 78, 58 S.Ct. 817, 82 L.Ed. 1188 (1938) ; Indiana Ins. Co. v. Pana Community Unit School Dist. No. 8, 314 F.3d 895, 900 (7th Cir. 2002) ("When neither party raises a conflict of law issue in a diversity case, the applicable law is that of the state in which the federal court sits."). Likewise, the agreement at issue specifies that Indiana law governs here. ECF 40-8 ¶ 12.

DISCUSSION

A. MCS Didn't Breach the Settlement Agreement When Superintendent Allen Responded to Hoax Phone Callers.

This case starts and ends with the settlement agreement's plain language. "[W]hen the terms of a contract are drafted in clear and unambiguous language, we will apply the plain and ordinary meaning of that language and enforce the contract according to those terms." Haegert v. Univ. of Evansville , 977 N.E.2d 924, 937 (Ind. 2012). "To prevail on a claim for breach of contract, the plaintiff must prove the existence of a contract, the defendant's breach of that contract, and damages resulting from the breach." Id. According to Mr. Pack, MCS breached the settlement agreement when Superintendent Allen told an undercover actor that Mr. Pack was terminated. Not so.

Mr. Pack argues that MCS violated only paragraph 6(B): "MCS agrees that ... in the event that it receives any inquiries from prospective employers of [Mr. Pack], ... MCS will provide only [Mr. Pack's] positions held and dates of employment, without other information or comment." ECF 40-8. This clause unambiguously prescribes MCS's duties in the face of inquiries from "prospective employers." The hoax callers, though perhaps in line for an Oscar, weren't prospective employers of Mr. Pack. In fact, Superintendent Allen hasn't received any inquiries about Mr. Pack from prospective employers....