Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 1 of 32

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION DAVID and TINA LONG, Individually, and as Natural Parents of TYLER LEE LONG, Deceased, ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) MURRAY COUNTY SCHOOL ) DISTRICT and GINA LINDER, ) In her individual and official ) Capacity as Principal of Murray ) County High School, ) ) Defendants. ) _______________________________

CIVIL ACTION NO.:

4:10-CV-00015-HLM

ANSWER AND DEFENSES OF DEFENDANTS MURRAY COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT AND GINA LINDER COME NOW Defendants Murray County School District and Gina Linder, in her individual and official capacity as Principal of Murray County High School (hereinafter collectively referred to as Defendants), and respond to the Complaint of the Plaintiffs by filing this Answer and further showing this Court as follows:

Page 1 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 2 of 32

FIRST DEFENSE For a first defense, Defendants respond to the enumerated paragraphs of the Plaintiffs Complaint as follows: PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE 1. Defendants admit that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Plaintiffs are residents of Murray County, Georgia; that they were the parents of Tyler Lee Long, deceased (Tyler Long) and that Tyler Long was a person with a disability. Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. To the extent paragraph 1 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial. 2. Defendants admit that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Murray County School District (hereinafter referred to as MCSD) operates the Murray County High School in Chatsworth, Georgia and can be served with process through its Superintendant, although it has acknowledged service. Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in

paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. To the

Page 2 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 3 of 32

extent paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial. 3. Defendants admit that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Defendant Gina Linder (hereinafter referred to as Linder) is the Principal of the Murray County High School and was at all relevant times. Defendant Linder has acknowledged service of the Complaint. To the extent paragraph 3 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial. 4. Paragraph 4 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial. To the extent such a response is required, Defendants deny that Plaintiffs have presented any viable claims, either federal or state, and as such deny the allegations made and demand strict proof thereof. 5. Paragraph 5 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial. To the extent such a response is required, Defendants deny that Plaintiffs have presented any viable
Page 3 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 4 of 32

claims, either federal or state, and as such deny the allegations made and demand strict proof thereof. 6. Defendants admit the facts as alleged in paragraph 6 of Plaintiffs Complaint. 7. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truthfulness of the facts as alleged in paragraph 7 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and therefore deny same and demand strict proof thereof. 8. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truthfulness of the facts as alleged in paragraph 8 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and therefore deny same and demand strict proof thereof.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND 9. Defendants admit that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 9 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long was a student at Murray County High School. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a
Page 4 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 5 of 32

belief as to the truthfulness of the facts as alleged in paragraph 9 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and therefore deny same and demand strict proof thereof; although MCSD records indicate that Tyler Longs birthday was April 25, 1992, not April 4, 1992 as alleged in the Complaint. 10. Defendants admit that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 10 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long was diagnosed with Asbergers Disorder and that he had an appropriate Individualized Education Program (hereinafter referred to as IEP) as mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act and that the appropriate members of the Murray County High School staff were aware of it. Defendants further state that the IEP that was put into place for Tyler Long by MCSD allowed him certain accommodations that were not available to all students at Murray County High School and that MCSD not only abided by the IEP, but also provided him accommodations that were not required by the IEP. Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in paragraph 10 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and therefore deny same and demand strict proof thereof. Because Tyler Long committed suicide at his home, the duty to protect him at his home belongs to the Plaintiffs.

Page 5 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 6 of 32

11. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truthfulness of the facts as alleged in paragraph 11 of Plaintiffs Complaint in that the definitions of what is (or was) Asbergers Disorder are (were) varied and the definition provided by Plaintiffs in paragraph 11 of Plaintiffs Complaint is incomplete. As such, Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 11 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. 12. No response is required of Defendants to paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs Complaint. To the extent any response is required, Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 12 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. 13. Defendants admit that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 13 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long had an IEP in place regarding Tyler Longs disabilities, but note that on February 3, 2006, Tyler Long was an 8th grade student at Gladden Middle School, not a high school student as alleged. Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in paragraph 13 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Long was not constantly bullied as alleged in

Plaintiffs Complaint. On the occasions when he utilized the accommodations in

Page 6 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 7 of 32

his IEP allowing him to leave class to speak with a teacher or counselor regarding stress that he was feeling due to interaction with another student, MCSD responded swiftly and appropriately. Although Plaintiffs made allegations of constant

bullying after Tyler Longs death, subsequent investigations revealed that the allegations made by Plaintiffs were unsupported or proven to be contrary to the facts. 14. Defendants admit the facts as alleged in paragraph 14 of Plaintiffs Complaint but clarify their admission that the language quoted in paragraph 14 of Plaintiffs Complaint is an incomplete quote from the Psycho-education report form of April 26, 2006. 15. Defendants deny the factual allegations contained in paragraph 15 of Plaintiffs Complaint. Investigations revealed that the allegations made by

Plaintiffs were unsupported or proven to be contrary to the facts and that no brutal and systemic pattern of bullying of Tyler Long occurred.

Page 7 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 8 of 32

16. Defendants deny the factual allegations contained in paragraph 16 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Long was not

ridiculed and emotionally bullied and physically beaten by other High School students on a regular basis. Subsequent investigations revealed that the

allegations made by Plaintiffs were unsupported or proven to be contrary to the facts. 17. Defendants deny the factual allegations contained in paragraph 17 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Subsequent investigations performed regarding the incident alleged in paragraph 17 of Plaintiffs Complaint determined the incident not to have occurred. During this limited time period, MCSD communicated with Plaintiff Tina Long who repeatedly expressed frustration both with Tyler Long and with dealing with his disability. Plaintiff Tina Long also expressed sincere appreciation for Murray County School District administrators stating that they had been of great help to her.

Page 8 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 9 of 32

18. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 18 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The investigation promptly performed by MCSD at the time of the incident revealed that the incident at issue did not happen as alleged. Nevertheless, the students found to be at fault for the incident were assigned to multiple days of In-School Suspension and the incident was turned over to the School Resource Officer (police). 19. Defendants deny the factual allegations contained in paragraph 19 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The investigation

performed by MCSD regarding the allegations made in paragraph 19 of Plaintiffs Complaint determined that the incidents at issue never occurred. It is important to note that during this time period, the school district had already assigned school resource officers and administrators to monitor the lunch room in addition to several regular lunch room employees. 20. Defendants deny the factual allegations contained in paragraph 20 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Defendants took

appropriate actions to fulfill their duties due to all students in Murray County High
Page 9 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 10 of 32

School, including Tyler Long, and provided him with all accommodations required by the IEP that MCSD put in place for him. 21. Defendants deny the factual allegations contained in paragraph 21 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. While Tyler Long did eat lunch with the teachers while he was in 8th Grade at Gladden Middle School, this was done at Plaintiff Tina Longs request and not in response to any complaint about alleged bullying. While in high school, Tyler Long was provided with accommodations regarding where he could eat, especially if he felt tense or was not having a good moment per his IEP. However, Plaintiff Tina Long repeatedly told MCSD that she did not want Tyler Long to use those accommodations unless absolutely necessary. There was no extent and consistency of bullying

experienced by Tyler Long. 22. Defendants deny that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 22 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long was bullied at Murray County High School and demand strict proof thereof. Defendants are without knowledge or information

Page 10 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 11 of 32

sufficient to form a belief as to the truthfulness of the remaining facts as alleged in paragraph 22 of Plaintiffs Complaint and therefore deny same and demand strict proof thereof. 23. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 23 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Plaintiff Tina Long participated in IEP meetings in which accommodations were discussed and implemented as part of Tyler Longs IEP. Tyler Longs situation was monitored in accordance with his IEP. In addition, Defendants never refused to meet with Plaintiffs and promptly responded to all inquiries. 24. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 24 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. On the rare occasion when

intervention was necessary for Tyler Long, members of MCSD intervened as appropriate. There was no repeated or systematic bullying of Tyler Long and MCSD provided a safe environment for Tyler Long. suicide at Plaintiffs house, not at or on MCSD property. Tyler Long committed

Page 11 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 12 of 32

25. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 25 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Long was not bullied on a regular basis nor would such behavior have been allowed. Defendants fulfilled all legal obligations. 26. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 26 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The allegations made after Tyler Longs death regarding the facts alleged in paragraph 26 of Plaintiffs Complaint were fully investigated and it was determined that no such incident ever occurred. In fact, it was further determined that one of the students mentioned in paragraph 26 of Plaintiffs Complaint, Z.H., was neither enrolled in the same guitar class as Tyler Long nor even on the same side of the building when the alleged incident supposedly took place. 27. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 27 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The allegations made after Tyler Longs death regarding the facts alleged in paragraph 27 of Plaintiffs Complaint were fully investigated and it was determined that no such incident ever occurred.
Page 12 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 13 of 32

The teacher was present in the classroom at all relevant times and his office which is adjoining to the classroom has a large glass window that allows the teacher to see into the classroom when he is in the adjoining office. 28. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 28 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The allegations made after Tyler Longs death regarding the facts alleged in paragraph 28 of Plaintiffs Complaint were fully investigated and it was determined that no such incidents ever occurred. In fact, Tyler Longs lead teacher, who was aware of his disability and IEP accommodations, saw Tyler Long on the afternoon of October 16, 2009 and noted nothing unusual about Tyler Longs mood. Tyler Long even commented to this lead teacher that he would see the lead teacher at Tyler Longs place of employment two days later. 29. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 29 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The allegations made after Tyler Longs death regarding the facts alleged in paragraph 29 of Plaintiffs Complaint were investigated by the Chatsworth Police Department who reported to MCSD that no such incidents ever occurred. It is understood that the video footage of the
Page 13 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 14 of 32

school bus for the afternoon of October 16, 2009, which is in the possession of the Chatsworth Police Department, shows that no student, including M.B. who is named in the Complaint, bullied Tyler Long on that date and that the only interactions on the video footage that are of note are Tyler Longs brother calling him gay and Tyler Longs sister calling him stupid. 30. Defendants admit that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 30 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long committed suicide in the early morning hours of October 17, 2009. Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truthfulness of the remaining facts as alleged in paragraph 30 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and therefore deny same and demand strict proof thereof. Only after the suicide did Plaintiff Tina Long provide Linder with information regarding Tyler Longs pre-suicide state-of-mind; however, Tyler Long committed suicide at Plaintiffs house and not on any property owned by MCSD. Defendants also understand that Tyler Long left a note explaining the reasons for his suicide.

Page 14 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 15 of 32

COUNT I: VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. 1983 DUE PROCESS 31. Defendants incorporate their responses to paragraphs 1-6 and 9-30 as if fully set forth herein and in response to the allegations contained in paragraph 31 of Plaintiffs Complaint. 32. Defendants admit that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Defendant Linder and Murray County High School employees act under color of law. Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in paragraph 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. 33. Defendants admit that portion of the facts as alleged in paragraph 33 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Defendant Linder and other employees of MCSD had actual knowledge of Tyler Longs disability. Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in paragraph 32 of Plaintiffs Complaint, including but not limited to any allegation that Tyler Long was subjected to systematic bullying and demand strict proof thereof.

Page 15 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 16 of 32

34. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 34 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. 35. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 35 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. There was no obvious, flagrant, rampant and continued bullying of Tyler Long at Murray County High School and the investigations into allegations of Tyler Longs suicide provides the support for such conclusion. 36. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 36 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Long committed suicide while under the care, custody and control of Plaintiffs, not Defendants. 37. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 37 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. As demonstrated by the investigations performed, there was no continual and pervasive bullying of Tyler Long. The appropriate employees at MCSD were properly and adequately trained to effectuate Tyler Longs IEP and investigated and responded as needed.
Page 16 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 17 of 32

38. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 38 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. As demonstrated by the investigations performed, there was no continual and pervasive bullying of Tyler Long. 39. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 39 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. All appropriate policies and

procedures were in place to effectuate Tyler Longs IEP. 40. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 40 of Plaintiffs Complaint, and demand strict proof thereof. 41. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 41 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Longs disability and his needs were appropriately addressed by Defendants. As demonstrated throughout this Answer, there was no ongoing bullying problem. 42. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 42 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.
Page 17 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 18 of 32

43. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 43 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.

COUNT II: VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. 1983 EQUAL PROTECTION 44. Defendants incorporate their responses to paragraphs 1-6, 9-30 and 32-43 as if fully set forth herein and in response to the allegations contained in paragraph 44 of Plaintiffs Complaint. 45. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 45 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. 46. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 46 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. As demonstrated throughout this Answer, there was no harassment, bullying and physical and emotional assaults upon Tyler Long; nor was there an environment of abuse and bullying within Murray County High School.
Page 18 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 19 of 32

47. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 47 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. 48. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 48 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. All appropriate school employees were adequately trained. 49. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 49 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. 50. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 50 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. 51. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 51 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. 52. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 52 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.
Page 19 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 20 of 32

COUNT III: VIOLATIONS OF 29 U.S.C. 794 AND 42 U.S.C. 12132 53. Defendants incorporate their responses to paragraphs 1-6, 9-30, 32-43 and 45-52 as if fully set forth herein and in response to the allegations contained in paragraph 53 of Plaintiffs Complaint. 54. Defendants admit that portion of the facts alleged in paragraph 54 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long was diagnosed with Asbergers Disorder. Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in paragraph 54 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. To the extent paragraph 54 of

Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial. 55. Defendant admits that portion of the facts alleged in paragraph 55 of Plaintiffs Complaint that Tyler Long was a student at Murray County School District, enrolled in Murray County High School and qualified for services, programs or activities. Defendants deny the remaining facts as alleged in

paragraph 55 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. There was no known bulling at Murray County High School. To the extent paragraph 55 of
Page 20 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 21 of 32

Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial. 56. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 56 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Long committed suicide at Plaintiffs house, not on any property owned by MCSD. 57. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 57 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The investigations performed

confirmed that there was no continuous bullying, harassment and physical and emotional abuse of Tyler Long at Murray County High School. 58. Paragraph 58 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial. To the extent such a response is required, Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 58 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. 59. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 59 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. The investigations performed
Page 21 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 22 of 32

confirmed that there was no constant bullying and harassment of Tyler Long and at no time did Linder or any other MCSD employee act in bad faith or demonstrate gross misjudgment. Only after the suicide did Plaintiff Tina Long provide Linder with information regarding Tyler Longs pre-suicide state-of-mind; however, Tyler Long committed suicide at Plaintiffs house and not on any property owned by MCSD. Defendants also understand that Tyler Long left a note explaining the reasons for his suicide. 60. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 60 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Tyler Long was provided a Free and Appropriate Public Education as evidenced by the effectuation of his IEP. As demonstrated throughout this Answer, there was no constant bullying and harassment of Tyler Long. 61. Paragraph 61 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial. To the extent such a response is required, Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 61 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.

Page 22 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 23 of 32

62. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 62 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.

COUNT IV: PUBLIC NUISANCE 63. Defendants incorporate their responses to paragraphs 1-6, 9-30, 32-43, 45-52 and 54-62 as if fully set forth herein and in response to the allegations contained in paragraph 63 of Plaintiffs Complaint. 64. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 64 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. Defendants fulfilled all obligations to Tyler Long and all other students at Murray County High School. 65. Paragraph 65 of Plaintiffs Complaint recites allegations of law, such legal conclusions do not require a specific admission or denial. To the extent such a response is required, Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 65 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.

Page 23 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 24 of 32

66. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 66 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. 67. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 67 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.

COUNT V: ATTORNEYS FEES UNDER 42 U.S.C. 1988 68. Defendants incorporate their responses to paragraphs 1-6, 9-30, 32-43, 45-52 and 64-67 as if fully set forth herein and in response to the allegations contained in paragraph 68 of Plaintiffs Complaint. 69. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 69 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof.

Page 24 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 25 of 32

COUNT VI: PUNITIVE DAMAGES 70. Defendants incorporate their responses to paragraphs 1-6, 9-30, 32-43, 45-52 and 64-67 as if fully set forth herein and in response to the allegations contained in paragraph 70 of Plaintiffs Complaint. 71. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 71 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. It is with great sorrow that this tragedy occurred, but neither MCSD nor Linder are liable for the suicide of Tyler Long that occurred while Tyler Long was at Plaintiffs house. 72. Defendants deny the facts as alleged in paragraph 72 of Plaintiffs Complaint and demand strict proof thereof. 73. No response is required of Defendants to the WHEREFORE paragraph of Plaintiffs Complaint. To the extent that one is required, Defendants deny the facts as alleged therein and demand strict proof thereof.

Page 25 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 26 of 32

74. Any and all facts as alleged in Plaintiffs Complaint which have not been expressly admitted by Defendants in this Answer are hereby denied and strict proof of same is hereby demanded. Second Defense Plaintiffs Complaint against Defendant fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Third Defense No action or omission on the part of either Defendant proximately caused the incidents at issue or the alleged injuries and damages of Plaintiffs, and therefore Plaintiffs cannot recover from either Defendant. Fourth Defense Plaintiffs are barred from equitable relief by the doctrine of unclean hands. Fifth Defense Plaintiffs claim for punitive damages is unconstitutional in violation of the Due Process Clauses of the United States and Georgia Constitutions. Sixth Defense Defendant Linder cannot be held liable in her official capacity.

Page 26 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 27 of 32

Seventh Defense At no time did any of the challenged actions and behavior on the part of either Defendant result in Plaintiffs being deprived of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the United States Constitution and laws or for any other unlawful reasons and, therefore, Plaintiffs claims in this lawsuit are not actionable under 42 U.S.C. 1983, the result being that Plaintiffs may not recover. Eighth Defense Defendant Linder in her individual capacity is protected by qualified immunity as to any federal constitutional claims because, at all relevant times, she was performing objectively reasonable discretionary acts as a public officer and did not violate any clearly established federal right which a reasonable person would have known. Ninth Defense Defendant Linder cannot be held liable for alleged violations of 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act and is not a proper party to claims brought pursuant to these Code Sections. violations of these Code Sections. Defendants expressly deny there were any

Page 27 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 28 of 32

Tenth Defense Defendants are entitled to the defense of sovereign and official immunity as to any claims alleged by Plaintiffs under Georgia law. Eleventh Defense Defendants cannot be held liable under 42 U.S.C. 1983 on the basis of respondeat superior. Twelfth Defense Defendants, including Defendant Linder in her official capacity, are immune from liability for punitive damages. Thirteenth Defense To the extent applicable, Plaintiffs alleged injuries and damages, if any, were proximately caused by entities of persons other than Defendants. Fourteenth Defense The allegations set forth in the Complaint do not rise to the level of a constitutional deprivation under color of state law and therefore do not support a claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. 1983.

Page 28 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 29 of 32

Fifteenth Defense Plaintiffs were not deprived of any federal, constitutional or statutory right as a result of the application of any policy, practice or custom of Defendant Murray County School District. Sixteenth Defense At no time did Defendants breach a legal duty to Plaintiffs, with the result that Plaintiffs may not recover against Defendants.

WHEREFORE, having responded to the Plaintiffs Complaint, Defendants respectfully request: (a) that the Court enter judgment in their favor and cast all costs of said action against Plaintiff; (b) (c) for a trial by jury of twelve (12); and for such further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Respectfully submitted this 16th day of April, 2010. s/Wayne S. Melnick Matthew G. Moffett Georgia Bar No.: 515323 Wayne s. Melnick Georgia Bar No.: 501267 Attorneys for Defendants Murray County School District and Gina Linder
Page 29 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 30 of 32

GRAY, RUST, ST. AMAND, MOFFETT & BRIESKE, L.L.P. 1700 Atlanta Plaza 950 East Pace Ferry Road Atlanta, Georgia 30326 Telephone: (404) 870-7390 Facsimile: (404) 870-1030 E-mail: mmoffett@grsmb.com wmelnick@grsmb.com s/ Martha Pearson Philip Hartley Georgia Bar No.: 333987 Martha Pearson Georgia Bar No.: 569375 Attorneys for Defendants Murray County School District and Gina Linder HARBEN, HARTLEY & HAWKINS, LLP 340 Jesse Jewell Parkway Suite 750 Gainesville, Georgia 30501 Telephone: (770) 534-7341 Facsimile: (770) 532-0399 E-mail: phartley@hhhlawyers.com mpearson@hhhlwayers.com

Page 30 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 31 of 32

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION DAVID and TINA LONG, Individually, and as Natural Parents of TYLER LEE LONG, Deceased, ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) MURRAY COUNTY SCHOOL ) DISTRICT and GINA LINDER, ) In her individual and official ) Capacity as Principal of Murray ) County High School, ) ) Defendants. ) _______________________________

CIVIL ACTION NO.:

4:10-CV-00015-HLM

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this day I electronically filed the ANSWER AND DEFENSES OF DEFENDANTS MURRAY COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT AND GINA LINDER with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system which will provide electronic notice of the filing to the following attorneys of record:

Page 31 of 32

Case 4:10-cv-00015-HLM Document 6

Filed 04/16/10 Page 32 of 32

W. Winston Briggs, Esq. W. WINSTON BRIGGS LAW FIRM 1005C Howell Mill Road Atlanta, Georgia 30318 Jonathan Zimring, Esq. ZIMRING LAW FIRM 114 New Street, Suite K-1 Decatur, Georgia 30030 Respectfully submitted this 16th day of April, 2010.

s/Wayne S. Melnick Matthew G. Moffett Georgia Bar No.: 515323 Wayne s. Melnick Georgia Bar No.: 501267 Attorneys for Defendants Murray County School District and Gina Linder GRAY, RUST, ST. AMAND, MOFFETT & BRIESKE, L.L.P. 1700 Atlanta Plaza 950 East Pace Ferry Road Atlanta, Georgia 30326 Telephone: (404) 870-7390 Facsimile: (404) 870-1030 E-mail: mmoffett@grsmb.com wmelnick@grsmb.com

Page 32 of 32