Robertson v. Univ. of Akron Sch. of Law

CLARK A. ROBERTSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF AKRON SCHOOL OF LAW, et al., Defendant-Appellees.

No. 21-3768

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

June 3, 2022

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Before: McKEAGUE, NALBANDIAN, and READLER, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

McKEAGUE, CIRCUIT JUDGE.

Clark Robertson was a student at the University of Akron School of Law. After a troubled year-and-a-half enrolled, during which time Robertson alleges he was subject to harassment because of his age and mental health diagnosis of anxiety, things came to a head when he left a voicemail that school officials interpreted as a statement of suicidal intent. He was then involuntarily committed by school police officers and suspended indefinitely pending a disciplinary hearing. Robertson brought this complaint, bringing as relevant here a variety of constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against University of Akron School of Law officials and University of Akron police officers, and a claim for disability discrimination under the Rehabilitation Act against the University of Akron School of Law. The district court granted defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings and dismissed Robertson's claims with prejudice. We AFFIRM.

I.

Clark Robertson enrolled at defendant University of Akron School of Law in January 2017 with a $15, 000 yearly scholarship. Robertson was a nontraditional student, enrolling in his sixties having already obtained two L.L.M.s and a J.D. A veteran, Robertson had been receiving social security disability benefits for two years prior to reaching retirement age because of a mental health disability of anxiety.

During his time at University of Akron, he alleges that he was "continually harassed and ridiculed . . . based on his age and mental health disability" by students and by defendants Dean Christopher J. Peters and Assistant Dean Charles Oldfield. He alleged that "Defendant [l]aw [s]chool personnel circulated emails containing disparaging remarks" about him, calling him an "odd duck."

In November 2017, Robertson alleges that Dean Oldfield was going to prohibit Robertson from sitting for an exam unless Robertson got evaluated for a psychiatric disorder. Robertson alleges that the purpose of this evaluation was to have him involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital. The diagnosing psychiatrists confirmed that he had anxiety but otherwise released him. Robertson alleges that he was medically unable to take the exam following this evaluation and that he was prohibited from taking a make-up examination that the school allowed for students without a mental health disability.

That same month, Robertson alleges that Dean Oldfield forced him to obtain counseling services from the University counseling center. Robertson also alleges that Dean Oldfield inspected Robertson's locker "[w]ithout cause" and asked him to open his bassoon case. Id. ¶ 13.

In March 2018, Robertson filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. On August 13, 2018, the parties met for a facilitated mediation. Robertson alleges that the mediator told him to drop the charges because of stress, and he did so.

On August 17, 2018, Robertson alleges that "certain Defendants engaged in further acts of harassment toward [him]." Id. ¶ 16. Specifically, he claims that Dean Oldfield told him that he "was going to f[***] his crazy ass." Id.

Because of this incident, on August 29, 2018, Robertson called the Office of Civil Rights mediator. He stated that he wanted to file a claim for retaliation because "they are discriminating [because of] my age and it is not right." Id. ¶17 (alteration in original). He said that he "did not want to commit suicide." But he continued that if they "want to push [him] to the edge … [he] will put them on the map … it will absolutely be a nasty mess." Id. (alterations in original).

After receiving Robertson's voicemail, the mediator forwarded the voicemail to her supervisor, who in turn forwarded it to law school personnel.

That afternoon, Robertson was meeting with nondefendant law school personnel requesting permission to drop his classes. "Defendant law school deans" contacted the University police department to take Robertson into custody. Id. ¶ 20. "Defendant Police officers" interviewed Robertson. Id. ¶ 21. Robertson told them that he did not own a gun and had no intention to harm himself or others, and that his statements about a "nasty mess" and putting "them on the map" were about his planned legal proceedings. Id. Robertson also told them to contact his physician, who he had spoken with earlier that day. His physician had not found him to be suicidal but diagnosed him with generalized anxiety disorder and moderate depression.

Robertson alleges that "Defendant law school personnel" then directed the police officers to listen to the voicemail. Id. ¶ 22. Robertson alleges that the officers then took him into custody because they suspected him to be a danger to himself or others. Officer Wayner drove Robertson to Summa Health Akron Emergency Department. On the way, Robertson alleges that Wayner left him in the car with the windows rolled up while the ambient temperature was over ninety degrees. This left Robertson dehydrated and with an acute kidney injury; he was placed on a saline drip for his first twenty-two hours in the hospital.

After a psychiatric evaluation, Robertson was transferred to a psychiatric hospital. Robertson alleges that he was coerced into signing voluntary admission paperwork; he was committed for eighteen days.

On August 30, 2018, the day after Robertson left the voicemail and was taken into custody, the University of Akron School of Law sent Robertson a letter informing him that he was banned from the university campus and would be subject to criminal trespass charges if he returned. The letter informed Robertson of a scheduled hearing regarding his conduct violation, where it would be determined if this disciplinary action was merited and if he should be excluded permanently from the University. The University's "written materials" noted that Robertson would be allowed an advisor for emotional support, who could be an attorney, but that the advisor would not be allowed to speak or cross-examine witnesses. Id. ¶ 28.

Robertson alleges that he objected to "being denied his right to legal counsel, his right to speak, and his right to cross-examination." Id. ¶ 30. His objections, he alleges, went ignored. He does not indicate to whom he communicated these objections.

Robertson "declined to attend the purported hearing," and he remains suspended from the campus. Id. ¶ 31.

Robertson brought an 11-count complaint against the University of Akron School of Law, Dean Christopher J. Peters, Assistant Dean Charles Oldfield, Interim President of the University of Akron John C. Green, Chief of the University of Akron Police Department Dale E. Gooding Jr., University of Akron Police Officers James P. Weber, Todd R. Hough, Thomas A. Gedeon, and Thomas Wayner, Summa Health System, and Dr. Thomas Gspandl. All defendants answered Robertson's complaint and all moved for judgment on the pleadings. Robertson then moved to voluntarily dismiss multiple counts of his complaint against certain defendants, which the district court granted without prejudice. The district court then granted defendants' motions on the remaining claims and dismissed them with prejudice.

Robertson appeals the district court's dismissal of his remaining claims with prejudice. He notes in his briefing that he "dismiss[es]" President Green and Chief of Police Gooding, and that "[a]lthough he believes the court's dismissals of the claims against Summa Hospital and Dr. Gspandl were in error, Rob[ertson] . . . focus[es] this appeal on the most important claims . . ." Appellant's Br. at 3. He similarly notes that he does not appeal his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against the University or its employees acting in their official capacity, his § 1983 Fifth Amendment claim, his constitutional conspiracy claims, or his constitutional failure to intervene claims. Robertson has therefore forfeited all but his remaining § 1983 claims against Dean Peters, Assistant Dean Oldfield, and Officers Weber, Hough, Gedeon, and Wayner; and the Rehabilitation Act claims against the University of Akron School of Law.

II.

We review the grant of a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) as we would review the grant of a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). Bates v. Green Farms Condo. Ass'n, 958 F.3d 470, 480 (6th Cir. 2020). We review de novo, accepting all factual allegations as true. D'Ambrosio v. Marino, 747 F.3d 378, 383 (6th Cir. 2014). We need not accept legal conclusions, however, and the factual allegations must "plausibly give rise to an entitlement of relief." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79 (2009). This requires "more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Republic Bank & Trust Co. v. Bear Stearns & Co., Inc., 683 F.3d 239, 246-47 (6th Cir. 2012) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)).

A. § 1983 Claims

Robertson brings a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim against Deans Oldfield and Peters and Officers Weber, Hough, Gedeon, and Wayner, alleging a variety of violations of his constitutional rights. The district court granted defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings on the grounds that Robertson's complaint grouped defendants together in such a way that it failed to place individual defendants on notice of their liability.

"This Court has consistently held...