You are on page 1of 20

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 1 of 20 PAGEID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


SOUTHERN DISTRICT OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

Kevin House,
by and through his guardian, mother,
and next friend Debbie Lynn House,
Plaintiff,
7.

Union Township, Ohio,


and
West Clermont Local School District
Board of Education,

and
Steven Siekbert, in his individual capacity,
and
Tom Robinson, in his individual capacity,
and
Robert Hatfield, in his individual capacity,
Defendants.
I.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:15-C V-00585


VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR
DECLARATORY RELIEF,
PERMANENT
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, AND
COMPENSATORY MONETARY
DAMAGES
(JURY DEMAND)

INTRODUCTION
1.

Constitutional principles, anti-discrimination and disability education statutes,

State of Ohio policies and regulations, and common law all bar unreasonable and otherwise
unlawful seizure and restraint of, and excessive force against, a student with autism and
cognitive and other multiple disabilities in a special school program. Law enforcement officers
and school officials cannot lawfully handcuff a student with multiple disabilities in that school
program designed to address the students behavioral challenges and then leave him prone for an

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 2 of 20 PAGEID #: 2

extended period. The totality of circumstances in this matter and the foreseeable significant
emotional injury to the disabled student bar the seizure, restraint, and excessive force.
2.

Mechanical restraint of students and prone restraint of students are each unlawful

in Ohio yet the Defendants simultaneously applied both to Plaintiff Kevin House. a
disabilities attending an educational program for students with disabilities.

student

with

The Defendants

acted recklessly. purposefully, and with deliberate indifference. In fact, they would do it all
again. The Plaintiffs address the Defendants systemic conduct and training deficiencies and seek
to prevent a recurrence of the Defendants unlawful seizure, restraint, and use of excessive force
against Kevin and against all other similarly situated children.
3.

Kevin is a young man with multiple disabilities including autism, moderate

intellectual disability, epilepsy, and behavioral challenges.

In September 2014. for reasons

directly related to his behavioral challenges. Kevin attended the Aspire Academy II program on
the Glen Este campus of the West Clermont Local School District. Kevin had an Individualized
Educational Program (1EV) and a professionally prepared Behavior Plan. Kevins Behavior
Plan identified that lie sometimes engaged in behaviors including aggression toward staff
including throwing items, hitting, kicking, and biting and that one of the purposes of the
Behavior Plan was to redirect Kevin from this aggressive behavior. On September 11, 2014, the
Defendants knowingly and recklessly ignored Kevins Behavior Plan and instead significantly
injured Kevin by unreasonably seizing him, using excessive force, and othenvise depriving the
student of rights protected under law. The Defendants systemically ignored essential law and
policy at the time and they systemically ignore that law and policy now.
II.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE


4.

This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1334.

23 U.S.C. 2201 and 2202. and 2$ U.S.C. 1361.


7

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 3 of 20 PAGEID #: 3

5.

Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) because the

Plaintiff resides in Clermont county, Ohio, the Defendants provide services in Clermont County,
Ohio, and the events giving rise to this action occurred in Clermont County, Ohio.
III.

PARTIES

6.

Kevin is now 20-years old and resides in Clermont County, Ohio. with his
Kevin has multiple disabilities including, but not limited to, autism, moderate

parents.

intellectual disability with an IQ level of 46, epilepsy, and behavioral challenges.

Kevin is

entitled to the full protection of the United States Constitution, federal and state antidiscrimination states, common law, and State of Ohio restraint policies. Kevin brings this action
through his mother and next friend Debbie Lynn I-louse.
7.

Debbie Lynn House is Kevins mother and resides in Clermont County, Ohio.

8.

Steven Siekbert (Siekbert) is a police officer employed by the Union Township.

Ohio, Police Department. Siekbert served as the School Resource Officer for Aspire Academy II
and other West Clermont programs on its Glen Este campus.
9.

Tom Robinson (Robinson) was Kevins classroom teacher and is employed by

the West Clermont Local School District.


10.

Robert Hatfield (Hatfield) was the assistant principal at Glen Este High School.

II.

Union Township. Ohio. is a statutory local government entity under Ohio law and

is capable of suing and being sued.

Union Township operates a police department (Police

Department or Union Township) that is a law enforcement agency in Clermont County, Ohio.
12.

West Clermont Local School District Board of Education (West Clermont or

school district) is an entity organized and existing under Ohio law and is capable of suing and
being sued. West Clermont created Kevins IEP and Behavior Plan.

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 4 of 20 PAGEID #: 4

IV.

FACTS

13.

Kevin had just turned 19-years old on September 11, 2014, when Police Officer

Siekbert teacher Robinson, and assistant principal Hatfield handcuffed Kevin in school, during
school hours, and placed him prone on the ground for approximately 30 minutes.
14.
16 years.

Kevin has been a student enrolled in the West Clermont Local School District for
In September 2014, Kevin attended Aspire Academy, a West Clermont transition

program intended to teach Kevin daily living, functional, and work skills, to remediate his
challenging behaviors, and to prepare him to live and work as independently as possible.
15.

Aspire Academy II is designed for students who have an IEP. otherwise have met

graduation requirements consistent with their IEP. but defer their diploma in order to attend the
Aspire Academy transition program.
16.

West Clermont and Union Township have an agreement for Union Township to

provide a School Resource Officer for the West Clermont Glen Este campus including Aspire
Academy.
17.

Defendant Siekbert is a law enforcement officer employed by Union Township

who was based in the West Clermont Glen Este campus as a School Resource Officer on
September 11. 2014.

Several weeks earlier, Kevins mother Debbie House had shown a

photograph of Kevin to Siekbert and informed him that Kevin attended a special program at the
school and that he had autism and behavioral challenges.
18.

In 2009, the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a

nationwide stiLdy documenting hundreds of incidents of restraint and seclusion in schools from
1990-2009 including 20 incidents causing death. Almost all the identified incidents involved
students with disabilities.

The GAO presented its study before the United States House of

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 5 of 20 PAGEID #: 5

The GAO explained that even without

Representatives Education and Labor Committee.

physical injury a student could be severely traumatized by a restraint.


Following the GAO report and testimony, United States Secretary of EdiLcation

19.

Arne Duncan requested that each state review and revise its restraint and seclusion policies.
On January 15. 2013, the Ohio State Board of Education approved the policy on

20.

Positive Behavior Interventions and Support and Restraint and Seclusion.

The Ohio policy

mandates that each school district must have a policy that specifically indicates that the use of
prone restraint

...

is prohibited. The policy further mandates that each school district is

required to have a plan regarding the training of its staff in accordance with this policy

On

April 9. 2013. the State Board of Education approved Ohio Administrative Code Section 330 135-15 prohibiting prone restraint and mechanical restraint.
West Clermonts Bylaws and Policies Section 5630.01Positive Behavior

21.

Intervention and Supports and Limited Use of Restraint and Seclusion provides: The Board is

committed to the District-wide use of Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports (PBIS) with
students

Professional staff members and support staff determined appropriate by the

Superintendent are permitted to physically restrain

a student

but only when

other safe and effective intervention possible, and the physical restraint

...

there is no

is used in a manner

that is age and developmentally appropriate.


22.

West Clermont Bylaws and Policies Section 5630.01 reqiLires: All restraint

shall only be done in accordance with this Policy, which is based on the standards adopted by the
State Board of Education regarding the use of student restraint
and the use of restraint

Training in methods of PBIS

ill be provided to all professional staff and support staff determined

appropriate by the Superintendent. Training will be in accordance with the States Standards.

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 6 of 20 PAGEID #: 6

Only school staff who are trained in permissible

physical restraint measures shall use such

techniques.
23.

Section 5630.01 prohibits mechanical restraints such as handcifffi and prohibits

prone restraints. The Bylaws and Policies plainly provides that physical restraint, mechanical

restraint, prone restraint, and chemical restraint are all different and leaves no doubt: The use of
restraint other than physical restraint is prohibited. Furthermore, physical restraint may be
implemented only by Student Personnel who have been trained in accordance with this Policy to
protect the care, welfare, dignity and safety of the student

The Defendants violated West

Clermonts own Bylaws and Policies by mechanically restraining Kevin, by placing and keeping
him prone. and by failing to protect his care, welfare, dignity and safety.
24.

As part of its planning for Kevins education, West Clermont created an essential

Behavior Plan for Kevin to describe his needs and to inform the responsive conduct of the
officials responsible for his welfare. Among other things, the Behavior Plan identified that
Kevins behavior also seems to be exacerbated when provided attention for disruptive
behavior. Also: During tantrums Kevin is likely to engage in aggression toward staff and
sometimes peers.
outbursts.

Staff indicates he is more difficult to physically manage during intense

The following behavior plan includes positive strategies currently in place to

proactively prevent difficulties and teach Kevin appropriate replacement behaviors. in addition
to a

crisLc plan to lie/p keep Kevin and others safe during intense burst of behavior (emphasis

added).
25.

Kevins behavior plan required that staff working directly with Kevin needs to

be trained in safe physical management

All staff working with Kevin needs to be trained in

the behavior plan cz;zcl implement the plan as written (emphasis added).

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 7 of 20 PAGEID #: 7

26.

The target behaviors in Kevins behavior plan included aggression (hitting,

kicking, scratching, throwing items, biting) and disruptive behaviors (throwing materials and
tipping furniture).

The behavior plan directed staff to [u]se a calm matter of fact tone in all

interactions with Kevin and that The more talking the more escalated Kevin becomes!! (all
emphasis in original).
27.

Kevins behavior plan added Yelling at or arguing with Kevin is considered a

challenge and will usually escalate matters to a physical confrontation (all emphasis in
original).
28.

The behavior plan had a Crisis Plan within it. The Crisis Plan directed the

adults responsible for Kevins welfare: Once Kevin has become physical, only one person
should talk to Kevin

A CPI [Crisis Prevention Institute] hold should only be used as a last

resort. Kevin becomes more aggravate[d] when more people are in the room.
29.

Needless to say, handcuffing and prone restraint are not CPI holds.

30.

Kevins behavior plan instructed the adults responsible for Kevin how to

administer CPI Trained Holds:

During holds, Kevins airway should be continually

monitored. While Kevin is being restrained [with CPI holds], he usually screams to be let go,
and name calls. Kevin is instructed by the team that as soon as he is quiet and still, the team will
walk away from him and remind that he is to go sit in the swing when they let him go. This is
repeated periodically throughout the restraint in a calm, nonthreatening manner.
31.

After a CPI hold is released, the Behavior Plan specifies that the individuals

attending to Kevin should help him physically cool down by placing a fan to blow air on him and
providing him with a cold drink. The plan requires that the staff give Kevin the option to swing
until he has completely calmed down and is able to return to the classroom

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 8 of 20 PAGEID #: 8

Siekbert, Robinson, Hatfield, Union Township, and West Clermont violated

32.

Union Township policies and procedures, West Clermont policies and procedures, State of Ohio
policies and regulations, and Kevins particularized Behavior Plan, all proscribing the use against
Kevin of mechanical restraints like handcuffs and proscribing the use of prone positions.

In

fact, the Defendants siuzziltaneously applied to Kevin both mechanical restraints and prolonged
prone positioning.
On September 11. 2014, while in attendance at Aspire Academy. Kevin

33.

accidentally broke his ear buds for his iPad and became very upset. Kevin began shouting and
throwing sonic objects.
restrained him.

He struck Aspire Academy staff and attempted to bite when they

About eight adults entered the room and it was very noisy. Two individuals

unsuccessfully tried to hold Kevin.


34.

Approximately 10 minutes after Kevin became upset, the West Clermont staff

called School Resource Officer Siekbert.

Defendant Siekbert arrived a few minutes later,

preempted Kevins Behavior Plan and State of Ohio and West Clermont policy, and assisted
West Clermont staff to lower Kevin to a prone position. Siekbert then placed handcuffs on Kevin
behind Kevins back and left him prone. Defendants Robinson and Hatfield assisted Siekbert in
securing the mechanical restraint and prone positioning. Hatfield further increased the risk of
Kevin becoming asphyxiated by placing a pillow under his head.

Defendants Siekbert,

Robinson, and I-Iatfield acted knowingly and recklessly and disregarded the substantial and
unjustifiable risk of injury to Kevin.
35.

About five minutes after Siekbert handcuffed Kevin and placed him in a prone

position other Union Township Police Department officers arrived in the room where Kevin was
prone and handcuffed.

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 9 of 20 PAGEID #: 9

36.

West Clermont staff called Plaintiff Debbie House during the incident and spoke

with her for about nine minutes. Nevertheless, nobody informed Kevins mom that they had
called Siekbert and did not inform her that Siekbert and others had mechanically restrained
Kevin with handcuffs and had placed him in a prone position.
37.

Almost 30 minutes into the incident, and after Kevin had been handcuffed and

placed prone, a West Clermont staff person called Debbie House crying.

The staff person

informed Kevins mom that the police had placed Kevin in handcuffs and he was lying on the
floor screaming.

In Houses words:

I thought I was going to throw up.

Another West

Clermont official took the phone and told Kevins mom that they were not going to press
charges.
38.

While Kevin was handcuffed and prone, Defendants Siekbert and Robinson,

working with other officials, forced Kevin to swallow a medicine tablet.


39.

Kevins father arrived at the school about 40 minutes into the incident and about

25 minutes after Kevin had been handcuffed and placed prone. Kevin was still lying prone on
the floor and screaming: Im going to jail. Im arrested. Even after Kevins father arrived
Siekbert would not release the handcuffs or change Kevins position until approved by his
supervisor.
40.

Kevins seizure with mechanical and prone restraints was not justified at its

inception and was not jusEified in its continuation for an extended period of time.
41.

The lack of pedagogical purpose, Kevins multiple disabilities, the known and

predictable adverse consequences, and the means used and extended time render the seizure and
use of force objectively unreasonable.

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 10 of 20 PAGEID #: 10

42.

When the Defendants finally ended their mechanical and prone restraint, Kevins

father took Kevin home. Kevin was unable to return to Aspire Academy.

1-Ic instead now

attends the Clermont County Board of Developmental Disabilities Thomas A. Wildey Center.
43.

The Affidavit of Alicia Cachat Logeman (Logeman Affidavit). M.Ed.. State of

Ohio recognized BCBA, Board Certified Behavioral Analyst. describes Kevin and what he
confronted from his perspective:
Autism is a disorder of brain development and is commonly characterized
by difficulties with communication, social interactions, and repetitive
behaviors. Kevin communicates verbally, but verbal individuals with
autism can struggle with using functional language to get their wants and
needs met. When Kevin was placed in a high anxiety situation
(mechanical restraints in a prone position), he was not able to deescalate
and process the situation. He was not able to use the language he does
have, to appropriately express his fear, discomfort, and anxiety. Kevin
reported he didnt understand why he was mechanically restrained. I-Ic
believed his headphones were broken and immediately reacted instead of
processing the situation. This is very common with individuals on the
autism spectrum. After his headphones were broken, Kevin engaged in
inappropriate behaviors when the team did not understand what he was
trying to communicate. Individuals with autism may also have trouble
regulating their emotions and this leads to inappropriate responses to
situations. Kevin did not understand why he was handcuffed and
describes the incident as going to war when he was handcuffed by the
staff at Aspire Academy.
44.

The Logeman Affidavit confirms:


Kevins behavior plan clearly states the interventions that are appropriate
and have proven successful with him in situations prior to September 11,
2014. Kevin becomes more agitated when more people are in the room
with him and once he has become physical, only one person should be
speaking to him in a calm, matter of fact tone. The behavior plan also
clearly states that yelling or arguing with Kevin will usually escalate
matters.

45.

The behavioral expert also attested:


Despite the extremely detailed behavior plan that outlines specific
interventions, crisis planning, and interventions to use, the documentation
by the school staff lists multiple violations of this plan. The district in their

10

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 11 of 20 PAGEID #: 11

voluntary police statements reports multiple violations of the behavior


plan. The district reports multiple people speaking with Kevin during the
incident (no clear team leader identified), all individuals interacting did
not use safe physical management (ineffectively blocking strikes, lack
appropriate CPI safe holds, and the use of mechanical restraints) and
Kevin was not directed to a preferred sensory activity. The school resource
officer was not trained in crisis prevention intervention. Kevin was
handcuffed, put into an extended prone position, and was not provided
access to mental health and medical treatment after the incident.
46.

The Logeman Affidavit emphasizes:


According to the Ohio Department of Education Policy of Positive
Behavior Interventions and Support, and Restraint and Seclusion, the
prone restraint is prohibited under all circumstances, including emergency
safety situations. Any restraint that unduly risks serious harm or needless
pain to the student is also a prohibited practice.

47.

The behavioral expert explained:


The behavior plan states that all individuals working with Kevin must be
trained in safe physical management. The staff and resource officer did not
display the correct use of CPI. Instead of using the behavior support plan
training and CPI, Kevin was handcuffed and placed in the prone position
for an extended period of time. This type of response might conceivably
occur in a public place where the individuals encountering Kevin have no
training, or knowledge of his history of behaviors or diagnosis of autism.
The staff involved had a specific behavior support plan, experience with
Kevin, and knowledge of his disabilities. The staff was also aware of his
reactions in frustrating or anxiety provoking situations. This training and
information was disregarded, and mechanical restraints and an extended
prone position were utilized instead of his behavior plan.

48.

Defendants West Clermont and Union Township have an agreement requiring that

Union Township provide a police officer known as a School Resource Officer to the school
districts Glen Este campus including Aspire Academy. That agreement provides that the police
officer will perform his/her regular police patrol duties in addition to those duties listed in the
School Resource Officer job description addendum
49.

The previously referenced job description addendum emphasizes that the School

Resource Officer specializes in involvement with local school officials and students in the role

11

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 12 of 20 PAGEID #: 12

of advisor, mentor, and protector. The job description addendum further emphasizes that the
School Resource Officer [p]erforms duties under the guidelines, policies, procedures, and
operating orders of the police department.
50.

According to the West Clermont agreement with Union Township, the School

Resource Officer is required to have knowledge of education techniques,

crisis intervention,

school policies.
51.

The agreement between West Clermont and Union Township required that

Union Township will hire, train, equip, supervise, manage, and evaluate appropriate personnel
selected for the School Resource Officer program.
52.

Union Township Police Department General Order PM 6-02 Response to

Resistance instructs police officers: The amount and type of response to resistance used by
members will be determined in each situation by the circumstances facing the member at the
time. Factors involved in a members decision to use an appropriate response may include, but
are not limited to, any of the following

The

mental characteristics of the offender

Whenever any prisoner is suffering from an injury requiring treatment, first aid procedures will
begin as soon as possible afier the person is secured and the incident scene is safe.
53.

Union Township Police Department General Order PM 6-02 Response to

Resistance, Section XVIII. A. requires that a supervisor conduct an investigation and submit a
report up the chain of command to the Operations Bureau Commander who makes a
recommendation to the Police Departments CEO. The CEO then makes a final
disposition and forwards it to the Administrative Services Commander.

Section XVIII. A.

cross-references Section I.I.a-i which includes as reportable response to resistance incident

12

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 13 of 20 PAGEID #: 13

both takedowns, person taken to ground and any incident of unusual nature as determined by
the on-duty supervisor. Union Township has not provided these reports to the Plaintiff
54.

Union Township has not properly trained, supervised, or managed its police

officers serving as School Resource Officers. The need to properly train, supervise, and manage
School Resource Officers with regard to the students at Aspire Academy, in particular, is an
obvious necessity and the risk of injury to students from Union Townships failure is very great
and foreseeable.
55.

Upon information and belief. Union Township did not train Seikbert about the

aforementioned State of Ohio policies. \Vest Clermont policies, or the behavior plans of students
such as Plaintiff Kevin House.
56.

A psychiatrist with Cincinnati Childrens Hospital Medical Center, Division of

Child Psvchiatiy. who has treated Kevin since 2008 concluded in 2015:
school in September

Since the incident at

[2014], [Kevin] has also been displaying post-traumatic stress

symptoms. including flashbacks, nightmares, and avoidance I have personally witnessed him
recoiling when hc is in our lobby and a security officer walks past, in which case he will grab
and hug his mother. This represents a definite change from his previous behavior and level of
anxiety. and it has now gone on for a duration consistent with PTSD. We are trying to provide
medication treatment for this, but the symptoms persist and worsen at times.
57.

Kevin had to be taken to the hospital for an emergency visit on September 17,

2014, because of increased anxiety, self-abuse, and perseverations.


58.

Kevin obsesses about the September 11, 2014, incident daily. He has

developmentally, socially, and emotionally regressed to the point of carrying a stuffed animal as
a protector with him when meeting new people. He also sleeps with stuffed animals for

13

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 14 of 20 PAGEID #: 14

protection. Pie frequently mentions that he thought he was going to be killed. Kevin limits his
access to the community due to the fear of being arrested. He often requires rescue medication to
control ovenvhelming anxiety. Long-term, Kevins opportunity for employment as well as living
independently from his parents (with support) in the community has dramatically decreased due
to his overwhelming anxiety and fear of leaving the house. He requires long-tern psychological
care to help him diminish the effects of the incident but he will never forget what happened to
him.
59.

In addition to significant and ongoing emotional distress, Kevin experienced

physical pain and injury during and after the seizure, restraint, and use of excessive force
described in this Complaint including, but not limited to, significant bruising.
60.

Kevin remains enrolled as a student in the West Clermont Local School District

even though he now attends Wildey.

West Clermont pays the Clermont County Board of

Developmental Disabilities for the cost of Kevins attendance at Wildey.


61.

Upon information and belief, the Defendants do not use handcuffs and extended

prone restraint in response to conduct that is expected and predictable for typical students in the
manner the Defendants did with Kevin.
62.

Upon information and belief, the Defendants do not expose typical students to the

risk of serious physical and emotional injury for conduct that is expected and predictable for
those typical students in the manner the Defendants did with Kevin.
63.

On September 17, 2014, West Clermont officials informed Debbie House that if

Kevin behaved the same way again that Yes, if it happened again we would do the same thing
again because that was West Clermonts policy. West Clermont also informed Debbie I-louse
that she was fortunate that Kevin had not been tased and that the Union Township Police

14

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 15 of 20 PAGEID #: 15

Department did not have to follow West Clermonts and the State of Ohios ban on mechanical
and prone restraints. West Clermont officials asserted that the police were in charge and that
West Clermont had no responsibility for what occurred to Kevin.

On September 30, 2014,

Defendant Robinson told Debbie House that Kevins Behavior Plan did not need any substantive
changes Because this plan worked and 1 did not want to get hit.
V.

CAUSES OF ACTION
COUNT I
DENIAL OF PLAINTIFFS FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO BE FREE FROM
UNREASONABLE SEIZURE AND EXCESSIVE FORCE42 U.S.C. 1983
64.

Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.

65.

The totality of circumstances described in this Complaint including Kevins

multiple disabilities, existing legal and policy proscriptions on mechanical and prone restraints,
officials ignoring the detailed plans for controlling Kevins predictable behavior, and the serious
foreseeable injuries to Kevin mandate the conclusion that Defendants Siekbert. Robinson, and
Flatlield acted unreasonably and without proper justification.
66.

Defendants Siekbert, Robinson, and 1-latfield deprived Kevin of his Fourth

Amendment entitlements to be free from unreasonable seizure and free from excessive force.
COUNT II
DENIAL OF PLAINTIFFS FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT LIBERTY RIGHTS TO BE
FREE FROM EXCESSIVE FORCE, FREE FROM UNREASONABLE RESTRICTIONS
ON BODILY INTEGRITY, AND DENIAL OF RIGHT TO PROPER CARE WHILE IN
GOVERNMENT CUSTODY42 U.S.C. 1983

67.

Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.

68.

Defendants Siekbert. Robinson, and Hatfield deprived Kevin of his Fourteenth

Amendment entitlement to be free from improper restrictions on his bodily integrity and free

15

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 16 of 20 PAGEID #: 16

from excessive force, and deprived Kevin of his right to proper care while in government
custody.

COUNT Ill
DENIAL OF PLAINTIFFS FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO EQUAL
PROTECTION OF THE LAW42 U.S.C. 1983
69.

Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.

70.

Upon information and belief, Defendants Siekbert, Robinson, and Hatfield have

not and do not leave non-disabled students handcuffed and prone for 30 minutes.
discriminatory conduct deprived Kevin of his

14th

Their

Amendment right to equal protection of the

laws.
COUNT IV
DEFENDANT UNION TOWNSHIPS UNCONSTITUTIONAL FAILURE TO TRAIN
42 U.S.C. 1983
71.

Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.

72.

Union Township knew that its policy and custom of failing to train its police

officers how to respond to students in school subject to Ohios and West Clermonts ban on
mechanical and prone restraints would proximately cause injury to students like Kevin.
73.

Union Township knew that its policy and custom of failing to train its police

officers how to respond to students in school subject to Behavior Plans would proximately cause
injury to students like Kevin.
74.

The need for proper training how to respond to students with disabilities in school

like Kevin is so obvious that Union Townships failure to do so deprived Kevin of his Fourth and
Fourteenth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable seizure and restraint, right to be free

16

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 17 of 20 PAGEID #: 17

from excessive force, right to be free from unreasonable restrictions on bodily integrity, and right
to receive proper care while in government custody.
COUNT V
DEFENDANT WEST CLERMONTS UNCONSTITUTIONAL FAILURE TO TRAIN
42 U.S.C. 1983
75.

Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.

76.

West Clermont knew that its policy and custom of failing to train its officials how

to respond to students in school subject to Ohios and West Clermonts ban on mechanical and
prone restraints would proximately cause injury to students like Kevin.
77.

West Clermont knew that its policy and custom of failing to train its officials how

to respond to students in school subject to Behavior Plans would proximately cause injury to
students like Kevin.
78.

The need for proper training how to respond to students with disabilities in school

like Kevin is so obvious that West Clermonts failure to do so deprived Kevin of his Fourth and
Fourteenth Amendment rights to be free from unreasonable seizure and restraint, right to be free
from excessive force, right to be free from unreasonable restrictions on bodily integrity, and right
to receive proper care while in government custody.
COUNT VI
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT/SECTION 503 OF THE REHABILITATION
ACT OF 1973

79.

Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.

80.

In violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. 12101. ci seq.

and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. 29 U.S.C. 794. West Clermont and Union

17

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 18 of 20 PAGEID #: 18

Township unlawfully discriminated against students with behavioral disabilities like Kevin and
failed to provide reasonable modifications to those students.
COUNT VII
INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILTIES EDUCATION ACT

81.

Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.

82.

West Clermonts systemic refusal to comply with Kevins Behavior Plan deprived

Kevin of his entitlement to a free and appropriate public education under the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act. 20 U.S.C. 1400. et seq. and caused Kevin significant regression.
COUNT VIII
ASSAULT AND BATTTERY

83.

Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.

84.

Defendants Siekbert. Robinson, and Hatfield acted intentionally and recklessly

and each committed assault and battery against Kevin.


COUNT IX
FALSE ARREST AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT

85.

Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.

86.

Defendants Siekbert. Robinson, and Hatfield acted intentionally and recklessly

and each falsely atTested and falsely imprisoned Kevin.


VI.

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

Wherefore, Plaintiffs request that this Court:


1.

Declare that the actions described herein violated Kevin Houses rights under the

Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Americans with
Disabilities Act. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Individuals with

18

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 19 of 20 PAGEID #: 19

Disabilities Education Act.

Further declare that West Clermonts and Union Townships

systemic deprivations of Kevins rights and the rights of similarly situated students are unlawful.
2.

Issue an order enjoining the Defendants from using mechanical restraints and

prone restraints on students like Kevin. enjoining the Defendants from ignoring the terms of
Behavior Plans for students like Kevin, and otherwise enjoin the Defendants

from

depriving

students like Kevin of their rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United
Stales Constitution, the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Ohio regulations and policy, and common
law.

Further enjoin West Clermonts and Union Townships systemic violations of Kevins

rights and the prospective systemic violations of the rights of similarly situated students.
3.

Award Plaintiff Kevin I-louse compensatory damages.

4.

Award Plaintiff Kevin House compensatory education and reimbursement for

expenditures occasioned by West Clermonts failure to provide him a free and appropriate public
education.
5.

Award reasonable attorneys fees and costs.

6.

Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.


Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Richard Ganulin


Richard Ganulin. Esq. (0025642)
Attorney at Law
3662 Kendall Avenue
Cincinnati, Ohio 45208
(513) 405-6696
ranulin(1:mail.com
Attorney for Kevin House, by and through his
guardian, mother, and next friend Debbie Lynn
House

19

Case: 1:15-cv-00585-MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/10/15 Page: 20 of 20 PAGEID #: 20

VERIFICATION

State

ofb

Count),

k Uifl

)
)

:uebbie Lynn House, guardian, mother, and next thend of Plaintiff Kevin House, being
duly sworn, says that the facmal allegations contained in this Complaint are tue to the best of
her knowledge.

.1!

Taken, sworn to and subscribed before me this

L day of S
/1

pternber, 2015.

7Not Public

KAJTLYN R. 8ROpjy
PUBLIC
Kent uc*y
At Laige
My CommissionState
Exptrcs 1O3/2o1s

20

.1.