Texarkana Arkansas School District v. T.R

Filing 40

ORDER granting 30 Motion to Stay Consideration of District's Motion for Summary Judgment. Jury trial of October 17, 2016 canceled. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on August 25, 2016. (mll)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION

TEXARKANA, ARKANSAS SCHOOL
DISTRICT
v.

PLAINTIFF

Case No. 4:15-cv-04101

T.R., by and through his parents, K.R. and R.R.

KIMBERLY RANDLES AND REGINALD RANDLES,
Individually, and as Next Friends of T.

DEFENDANT

THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFFS

v.
TEXARKANA SCHOOL DISTRICT; BECKY KESLER,
Superintendent of Schools, Individually; and
SHERRY YOUNG, Director of Special Education,
Individually

THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant’s/Third-Party Plaintiffs’ (“Parents”) Motion to Stay
Consideration of District’s Motion for Summary Judgment. ECF No. 30. Plaintiff/Third-Party
Defendant Texarkana, Arkansas School District (“District”) has filed a response. ECF No. 34. The
Court finds the matter ripe for consideration.
This case involves IDEA claims, which are the subject of the District’s administrative appeal,
and non-IDEA claims, which are the Parents’ claims against the District and individually named
Defendants for unlawful racial and disability discrimination pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Title VI
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and the Americans with
Disabilities Act. The Parents’ claims against the District, or the non-IDEA claims, are subject to a
jury trial while the IDEA claims are for the Court to resolve.
The District has filed a summary judgment motion that encompasses both the IDEA claims

and non-IDEA claims. The standard of review, however, is different for an IDEA appeal as
compared to the standard of review for a summary judgment motion on non-IDEA claims. Further,
the IDEA claims do not involve the potential individual liability of Third-Party Defendants Becky
Kesler or Sherry Young. Thus, the Parents move the Court to stay consideration of the non-IDEA
claims until the IDEA claims have been decided.
Upon consideration, the Court finds that the Parents’ motion (ECF No. 30) should be and
hereby is GRANTED.1 The Court will stay its consideration of the non-IDEA claims until the IDEA
claims have been decided. The jury trial scheduled for October 17, 2016, is cancelled. Once the
IDEA claims have been decided on the briefs that have already been submitted, the Court will issue
a new trial date and scheduling order for the non-IDEA claims, should these claims survive the
District’s summary judgment motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 25th day of August, 2016.

/s/ Susan O. Hickey
Susan O. Hickey
United States District Judge

1

The Parents also move the Court to stay consideration of the District’s summary judgment motion until certain alleged
deficiencies in the District’s Statement of Facts are corrected. It appears to the Court that this issue is MOOT. The
Parents have responded to the District’s Statement of Facts despite their argument that the Statement of Facts is deficient
because it is not concise and does not include citations to the record. Should the Court, however, find the Statement of
Facts deficient for purposes of deciding the summary judgment motion, it will notify the District of any deficiencies.