Sabbah v. Springfield Sch. Dist.

NADIA SABBAH, et al., Plaintiffs v. SPRINGFIELD SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant

CIVIL ACTION No. 19-5564

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MAY 26, 2021

MEMORANDUM

PRATTER, J.

Schools are expected to ensure a safe learning environment for their students and staff. In light of school shootings and other acts of violence on school property, when school personnel learn of a potential threat of violence, the school is obligated to treat the threat seriously and at least investigate it. Within the bounds imposed by the Constitution and state law, schools have the reasonable discretion and authority to investigate threats and discipline their students as is appropriate. But, consistent with the obligation to act in good faith, schools often must make certain decisions with imperfect knowledge and under time pressure. With the benefit of hindsight, what initially presented as a threat may—mercifully—end up being harmless. Sometimes a school's over-cautious response may give rise to a federal cause of action. Other times—as is the case here—it does not.

For the reasons that follow, the Court grants Springfield's motion for summary judgment.

BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

During the 2017-18 school year, Plaintiff H.M. was enrolled as a sixth grader at E.T. Richardson Middle School, within the Springfield School District. Her two younger siblings, B.M. and E.M., were enrolled in an elementary school also within the district. The family self-identifies as Arab American.

I. The "To Kill List" and the Investigation

On November 27, 2017, a sheet of paper entitled "To Kill List" was found on a classroom floor at the middle school. The anonymously authored note, which listed seven names of current students at the school, was brought to the school's administration. In response, administrators began investigating possible author(s) of the list. That evening, administrators sent a community-wide email stating that a threatening note had been found and that the families of the students listed in the note had been contacted.

To identify the author by his or her handwriting, the school collected and reviewed journals of many students in the classroom where the note was found, including H.M. Dr. Tracy Depo Tr. at 9:21-10:11. The day after the note was found, administrators questioned the students whose journals were reviewed. All of these initial interviews were conducted without parents or guardians present. Dr. Tracy Depo. Tr. at 12:20-22. H.M. initially disclaimed any knowledge of the list, as did every other student questioned. Id. at 14:7-10; 17:23-18:3.

While reviewing the students' journals, the principal, Dr. Daniel Tracy, noticed what he described as "concerning" writing and drawings. Id. at 18:22-19:6, 20:6-7. Specifically, he testified to seeing drawings of "what appeared to be knives." Id. at 19:2-3. Based on the content in the journal, as well as similarities in handwriting between the journal and the "To Kill List" note, Dr. Tracy determined it was worth following up with H.M. to express concern for her safety. Id. at 20:6-10. H.M.'s mother, Mrs. Sabbah, does not dispute that her daughter drew pictures of what look like swords or knives and wrote the words "I want to die" at the bottom of her drawing. N.S. Depo. Tr. at 18:17-19:3. But she explained that her daughter was fascinated with anime and a popular song, "I want to die" which was playing frequently on the radio at the time. Id.

Dr. Tracy testified that the contents of H.M.'s journal constituted "new information" or "new concerns" meriting a follow-up conversation. Dr. Tracy Depo. Tr. at 18:8-20:10. So, H.M.was again asked to speak with administrators. H.M. was questioned in the presence of Dr. Tracy, Dr. Jeffrey Zweiback, the Director of Teaching and Learning for the Springfield School District, and Assistant Principal Megan Scelfo. Her parents were not present for this conversation. This time, she was asked to provide a handwriting sample writing her classmates' names. She was not shown the "To Kill List" while she wrote out her handwriting sample.

When she was asked why her handwriting appeared to be a close match to one of the names on the list, H.M. responded that she wrote "it." Dr. Zweiback Depo. Tr. at 35:6-36:3; Dr. Tracy Depo. Tr. at 28:1-2; H.M. Depo. Tr. at 33:18-23. She eventually was showed the names on the "To Kill List," but not the title of the note. She was never explicitly asked whether her "it" reference meant that she admitted to authoring the entire list or only the seventh name that seemed to be the exemplar match. However, per school officials, H.M. explained that each name on the list was someone who had allegedly wronged her. Dr. Tracy Depo. Tr. at 30:1-6. This explanation is bolstered by the "Incident Report" that H.M. wrote on November 28, in which she explained that she "made the list for people I need to stay away from" and had kept the list since she was in the second grade.

H.M. frames the events slightly differently. She testified that, although she wrote down "something for each of the names" on the list, she felt "intimidated" and "needed to write something down." H.M. Depo. Tr. at 21:21-22:1. But, she also admitted that no one coached her to write the contents of the "Incident Report." Id. at 40:9-12.

It is undisputed that the school notified H.M.'s parents only after she admitted to writing at least part of the note. Dr. Tracy Depo. Tr. at 32:6-8. The parties dispute what happened next. Mrs. Sabbah testified that Dr. Tracy told her that H.M. "will never be accepted in public or private school in the United States." N.S. Depo. Tr. at 8:4-5. She further testified Dr. Tracy told her that her daughter "represents a danger to my school. I have to protect my school from your daughter."Id. at 16:19-21. Dr. Tracy denied that he spoke abruptly with Mrs. Sabbah or told her "you people have anger problems." Dr. Tracy Depo. Tr. at 58:3-9. There are no allegations that any of the school officials explicitly mentioned H.M.'s ethnicity, race, or background.

Later that evening, Mrs. Sabbah informed the school that another student wrote the list, although she would not identify that student. Id. at 13:22-14:6. That explanation was offered after H.M. was released to go home and had talked to her mother. H.M. Depo. Tr. at 43:2-11. That same evening, the school sent a follow-up email to the school community stating it that a student had admitted to writing the list. H.M. was not named in this communication. Doc. No. 12-17.

II. The Informal Hearing and Suspension

Because she admitted to writing at least part of the list, H.M. was suspended pending an informal hearing. H.M.'s parents were provided written notice of the hearing as well as the underlying allegations. The initial hearing date was pushed back four days with Plaintiffs' consent to accommodate the school's attorney's schedule. On December 5, 2017, Plaintiffs presented evidence, including a handwriting expert report and a doctor's note. Plaintiffs also again informed the school that another student was involved in the note. Doc. No. 12-18 ¶ 21. H.M. again did not deny that she wrote a name on the list but, as stated at the hearing, that was to help remind a friend of another student's name. Following the hearing, H.M. received a ten-day suspension, which was later shortened to nine days, to allow her to participate in a school concert.

At her deposition, H.M. further explained that the names were those of students with whom this alleged author did not get along. H.M. stated that she tried to get this classmate's attention by writing down a seventh name so she could be a "peace-maker." H.M. Depo. Tr. at 16:14-17:8. She testified that, at the time she wrote on the list, it was untitled (i.e., no words "to kill list" appeared at the top), id. at 16:14-15, and that, when she was questioned by the school officials, shedid not make the connection that the names of the students she was asked about were those on the list, id at 28:18-23.

III. The "Standard Evaluation Packet"

Roughly within a week of these events, Springfield provided H.M.'s parents with a "standard evaluation packet." Dr. Zweiback testified that, in light of the contents of H.M.'s journal—the drawings of knives and the words, "I want to die,"—he made a referral to the school's Office of Special Education. Dr. Zweiback Depo. Tr. at 72:3-6. The school represents that it supplied the standard evaluation packet as part of its "Child Find" obligations to locate students who may need special services. Among the various assessment tools in the school's standard evaluation packet, H.M.'s parents were provided with the Abbreviated Multidimensional Acculturation Scale (AMAS-ZAAB) questionnaire. The school describes this as a tool used for bicultural students to evaluate the impact of cultural identity on a child's makeup. Id. at 62:15-64:8. Dr. Zweiback testified that Springfield had used this battery of questions about 12 times with students referred to the Office of Special Education who the school identified as having a "bicultural family" or who were multilingual. Id. at 58:12-14.

Plaintiffs cast this questionnaire in a totally different light. Based on their understanding of the questions and the context in which it was provided, Plaintiffs contend that the AMAS-ZAAB is a sort of 'Patriot test' despite H.M.'s American citizenship.

IV. Springfield's Obligations and Contact with Police

The Springfield School District is a public-school district organized and operating under Pennsylvania's Public School Code of 1949, 24 P.S. §§ 1-101 et seq. Pursuant to the Code, Springfield may enact reasonable rules and regulations regarding the "conduct and deportment of all pupils" while they are under supervision of the school. 24 P.S. § 510. Springfield has enacted various policies addressing student behavior, including discipline proceedings. Students at E.T.Richardson Middle School are subject to these...