HILL et al v. REGIONAL SCHOOL UNIT 21
Filing
9
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS denying 5 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim - By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mnw)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
BRIAN HILL AND CAREY ANNE HILL
O/B/O K.H., A MINOR,
PLAINTIFFS
V.
REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 21,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CIVIL NO. 2:16-CV-162-DBH
DEFENDANT
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
The defendant’s motion to dismiss is DENIED.
Under the pleading
standards of Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (1999) and Bell Atlantic Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), the Complaint contains sufficient factual matter
“plausible on its face,” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678, to state a claim of severe, pervasive,
and objectively offensive gender-based harassment; that the defendant school
unit had notice of it and was deliberately indifferent to it; and that the
harassment prevented access to an educational opportunity or benefit.
See
Davis v. Monroe Cty. Bd. of Educ., 526 U.S. 629 (1999); Frazier v. Fairhaven
Sch. Comm., 276 F.3d 52 (1st Cir. 2002); Doe v. Sch. Admin. Dist. No. 19, 66 F.
Supp. 2d 57 (D. Me. 1999).1
SO ORDERED.
DATED THIS 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2016
/S/D. BROCK HORNBY
D. BROCK HORNBY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
I have also consulted the very recent case of Morgan v. Town of Lexington, No. 15-2174, 2016
WL 2962187 at *5-6 (1st Cir. May 23, 2016).
1
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?