• ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION EBONEE TATE, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. ______________ § PARIS JUNIOR COLLEGE, SEAN LEBEAUF, AND DR. PAM ANGLIN, § § § Defendants. § ORIGINAL COMPLAINT NOW COMES Plaintiff Ebonee Tate in the above entitled and numbered cause and files this Original Complaint complaining of Defendants Paris Junior College, Sean LeBeauf, and Dr. Pam Anglin, and in support thereof respectfully shows the Court the following: I. PARTIES 1. Ebonee Tate (“Tate”) is an individual resident of Tarrant County, Texas. 2. Defendant Paris Junior College (“PJC”) is a Texas college and member of the Southern Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. PJC may be served through its President, Dr. Pam Anglin, at 2400 Clarksville Street, Paris, Texas 75460-6298. 3. Defendant Dr. Pam Anglin (“Dr. Anglin”) is an individual resident of Texas and may be served with process at her principal place of business at 2400 Clarksville Street, Paris, Texas 75460-6298. 4. Defendant Sean LeBeauf is an individual resident of Arizona, and may be served with process at his place of business: The University of Arizona Athletics, McKale Center, 1 National Championship Drive, P.O. Box 210096, Room 228F, Tucson, Arizona 85721. Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 2 II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 5. Jurisdiction over this action is based upon Title IX, 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq., 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question jurisdiction). 6. Venue of this action is proper in the Eastern District of Texas because the incidents giving rise to this lawsuit occurred in Lamar County, Texas. III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 7. In 2011, Tate graduated from Paul Laurence Dunbar High School in Fort Worth, Texas, and received a full scholarship offer to attend PJC as a member of its women’s basketball team. Tate accepted the scholarship offer, enrolled, and began classes that fall. During her first semester at PJC, Tate earned a starting position on the basketball team and became one of its leading scorers early in the season. Tate remained satisfied with her affiliation with the basketball team and the education she received from PJC through the end of the first semester of the 2011-2012 school year. 8. However, circumstances changed when Coach Sean Lebeauf (“Coach LaBeauf”) began to engage in inappropriate and unacceptable behavior by subjecting Tate to persistent, sexually oriented discussions and encounters. In or around December 2011, Coach LeBeauf saw Tate at a school sponsored event and began to make romantic gestures toward her, including “blowing her a kiss” across the gym. Tate ignored him. However, Tate’s refusal to engage Coach LeBeauf did not deter his efforts. In March 2012, Coach LeBeauf started sending Tate suggestive text messages with unsolicited and unwanted sex-specific language such as the following: Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 2
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 3 “Love u Ebonee”; “U need to lose 10 lbs… U need to lose weight… Ur sexy at 164, but u would be even sexier at 155”; “I want u to dress up for me” 9. Although Tate ignored each message, she became increasingly concerned with the Coach’s growing attention. She even shared these concerns with a fellow teammate, who also witnessed Coach LeBeauf’s inappropriate behavior and communication. Coach LeBeauf continued to harass Tate with his unwanted sexual advances. When it became clear that Tate would not return his text messages or advances, Coach LeBeauf’s demeanor with her changed dramatically. He began to call Tate’s mother to complain about her behavior, he stripped her of previously earned playing time, and he even threatened to replace her in the starting line-up. 10. It was common knowledge that Coach LeBeauf had been known to regularly engage in inappropriate sexual contact with the players on PJC’s women’s basketball team, both past and present. In 2011, another basketball player admitted to her teammates that Coach LeBeauf sent her similarly suggestive text messages and kissed her after luring her into his office one evening. Another teammate left the team in 2011 after Coach LeBeauf became inappropriate with her and even sent her mother a picture of his genitals. At least one player admitted to having a sexual affair with Coach LeBeauf in 2010. 11. Tate grew weary of dealing with Coach LeBeauf’s inappropriate sexual harassment and the backlash from ignoring his advances. As a result, Tate contacted PJC’s president, Dr. Pam Anglin, to report Coach LeBeauf’s inappropriate behavior. When Tate spoke with Dr. Anglin, it was clear Coach LeBeauf received prior notification of the meeting against Tate’s wishes. Dr. Anglin told Tate she knew Coach LeBeauf might have sent her some inappropriate messages but she should not be concerned. Although Tate told Dr. Anglin she was Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 3
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 4 aware of his past with PJC players and his interaction with her made her fearful and uncomfortable, Dr. Anglin told her not to worry. Dr. Anglin assured Tate that Coach LeBeauf was not a threat and, as in her own experience, sometimes men will flirt and harass you in the “real world” and that Tate should learn to deal with it. Dr. Anglin later admitted that complaints like this against Coach LeBeauf had happened many times before and she was willing to do whatever was necessary to “make this go away.” 12. As a result of Dr. Anglin’s dismissive attitude, Coach LeBeauf retaliated against Tate, further exacerbating an already hostile environment in the women’s basketball program. Coach LeBeauf intimidated Tate, threatened to take away her scholarship, and even refused to allow the school to pay for injuries she sustained in a basketball game earlier that semester. This ordeal forced Tate to lose her scholarship, her opportunity to finish school at PJC, and irreparable mental and emotional distress. IV. CLAIMS COUNT 1: TITLE IX VIOLATION 13. Tate incorporates by reference all of the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 12 as if fully set forth at this point herein. 14. In violation of Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.), Coach LeBeauf’s discriminatory actions against Tate constituted coach-on-student quid pro quo sexual harassment which created a hostile environment for her and others within the PJC women’s basketball program. Tate was (1) a student at an educational institution receiving federal funds; (2) she was subjected to harassment based on her sex; (3) the harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile (or abusive) environment in an Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 4
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 5 educational program or activity; and (4) there is a basis for imputing liability to the institution. When Tate rejected Coach LeBeauf’s advances and complained about his unlawful sexual harassment, Coach LeBeauf, PJC, and Dr. Anglin retaliated against Tate forcing Tate to lose her scholarship. PJC and Dr. Anglin had actual knowledge of Coach LeBeauf’s sexual harassment and acted with deliberate indifference to the misconduct and did not institute corrective measures. 15. As a direct and proximate result of PJC’s, Dr. Anglin’s, and Coach LeBeauf’s conduct as set forth herein, Tate has suffered actual and compensatory damages, including, but not limited to, loss of scholarship, loss of enjoyment of life, pain, suffering, inconvenience, and mental anguish. Tate will show that PJC’s, Dr. Anglin’s, and Coach LeBeauf’s conduct as alleged herein was intentional and PJC, Dr. Anglin, and Coach LeBeauf acted with malice and/or reckless indifference further entitling Tate to compensatory and punitive damages. COUNT 2: § 1983 CLAIM FOR SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND RETALIATION 16. Tate incorporates by reference all of the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 15 as if fully set forth at this point herein. 17. The sexual harassment and retaliation suffered by Tate as set forth in the foregoing section constitutes a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in that PJC, Dr. Anglin, and Coach LeBeauf violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 18. As a direct and proximate result of PJC’s, Dr. Anglin’s, and Coach LeBeauf’s conduct as set forth herein, Tate has suffered actual and compensatory damages, including, but not limited to, loss of scholarship, loss of enjoyment of life, pain, suffering, inconvenience, and mental anguish. Tate will show that PJC’s, Dr. Anglin’s, and Coach LeBeauf’s conduct as Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 5
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 6 alleged herein was intentional and PJC, Dr. Anglin, and Coach LeBeauf acted with malice and/or reckless indifference further entitling Tate to compensatory and punitive damages. V. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 19. Tate incorporates by reference all of the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 18 as if fully set forth at this point herein. 20. All conditions precedent to Tate’s recovery has been performed, have occurred, or have been waived. VI. ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 21. Tate incorporates by reference all of the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 20 as if fully set forth at this point herein. 22. In addition to actual, compensatory, and punitive damages, Tate seeks to recover her reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees and costs, including reasonable expert witness fees, as permitted under Title VII and/or 42 U.S.C. § 1988. VII. JURY DEMAND 23. Tate hereby demands trial by jury. VIII. PRAYER WHEREFORE, Tate requests that Defendants be cited to appear and answer, and that on final trial by jury, Tate have and recover from Defendants as follows: (1) actual, compensatory, and exemplary damages; (2) pre- and post judgment interest at the highest rates Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 6
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 7 allowed by law; (3) attorney’s fees; (4) costs of Court; and (5) such other relief, at law or in equity, to which Tate may be justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, _________________________________ NELLIE G. HOOPER State Bar No. 00798211 JEFFREY D. SMITH State Bar No. 24063008 BLANSCET HOOPER & HALE, L.L.P. 14285 Midway Road, Suite 400 Addison, Texas 75001 (214) 764-7973 (214) 764-7981 (Telecopy) And DAVID R. GIBSON State Bar No. 07861220 VALERIE L. NORRIS Valerie L. Norris State Bar No. 24073225 1801 North Hampton Road, Suite 370 DeSoto, Texas 75115 (972) 291-9300 (972) 291-0636 (Telecopy) ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 7
Please download to view
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
...

LeBeauf complaint

by enrique-espinoza

on

Report

Category:

Documents

Download: 0

Comment: 0

141,556

views

Comments

Description

full complaint
Download LeBeauf complaint

Transcript

  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION EBONEE TATE, § § Plaintiff, § § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. ______________ § PARIS JUNIOR COLLEGE, SEAN LEBEAUF, AND DR. PAM ANGLIN, § § § Defendants. § ORIGINAL COMPLAINT NOW COMES Plaintiff Ebonee Tate in the above entitled and numbered cause and files this Original Complaint complaining of Defendants Paris Junior College, Sean LeBeauf, and Dr. Pam Anglin, and in support thereof respectfully shows the Court the following: I. PARTIES 1. Ebonee Tate (“Tate”) is an individual resident of Tarrant County, Texas. 2. Defendant Paris Junior College (“PJC”) is a Texas college and member of the Southern Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. PJC may be served through its President, Dr. Pam Anglin, at 2400 Clarksville Street, Paris, Texas 75460-6298. 3. Defendant Dr. Pam Anglin (“Dr. Anglin”) is an individual resident of Texas and may be served with process at her principal place of business at 2400 Clarksville Street, Paris, Texas 75460-6298. 4. Defendant Sean LeBeauf is an individual resident of Arizona, and may be served with process at his place of business: The University of Arizona Athletics, McKale Center, 1 National Championship Drive, P.O. Box 210096, Room 228F, Tucson, Arizona 85721. Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 2 II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 5. Jurisdiction over this action is based upon Title IX, 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq., 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question jurisdiction). 6. Venue of this action is proper in the Eastern District of Texas because the incidents giving rise to this lawsuit occurred in Lamar County, Texas. III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 7. In 2011, Tate graduated from Paul Laurence Dunbar High School in Fort Worth, Texas, and received a full scholarship offer to attend PJC as a member of its women’s basketball team. Tate accepted the scholarship offer, enrolled, and began classes that fall. During her first semester at PJC, Tate earned a starting position on the basketball team and became one of its leading scorers early in the season. Tate remained satisfied with her affiliation with the basketball team and the education she received from PJC through the end of the first semester of the 2011-2012 school year. 8. However, circumstances changed when Coach Sean Lebeauf (“Coach LaBeauf”) began to engage in inappropriate and unacceptable behavior by subjecting Tate to persistent, sexually oriented discussions and encounters. In or around December 2011, Coach LeBeauf saw Tate at a school sponsored event and began to make romantic gestures toward her, including “blowing her a kiss” across the gym. Tate ignored him. However, Tate’s refusal to engage Coach LeBeauf did not deter his efforts. In March 2012, Coach LeBeauf started sending Tate suggestive text messages with unsolicited and unwanted sex-specific language such as the following: Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 2
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 3 “Love u Ebonee”; “U need to lose 10 lbs… U need to lose weight… Ur sexy at 164, but u would be even sexier at 155”; “I want u to dress up for me” 9. Although Tate ignored each message, she became increasingly concerned with the Coach’s growing attention. She even shared these concerns with a fellow teammate, who also witnessed Coach LeBeauf’s inappropriate behavior and communication. Coach LeBeauf continued to harass Tate with his unwanted sexual advances. When it became clear that Tate would not return his text messages or advances, Coach LeBeauf’s demeanor with her changed dramatically. He began to call Tate’s mother to complain about her behavior, he stripped her of previously earned playing time, and he even threatened to replace her in the starting line-up. 10. It was common knowledge that Coach LeBeauf had been known to regularly engage in inappropriate sexual contact with the players on PJC’s women’s basketball team, both past and present. In 2011, another basketball player admitted to her teammates that Coach LeBeauf sent her similarly suggestive text messages and kissed her after luring her into his office one evening. Another teammate left the team in 2011 after Coach LeBeauf became inappropriate with her and even sent her mother a picture of his genitals. At least one player admitted to having a sexual affair with Coach LeBeauf in 2010. 11. Tate grew weary of dealing with Coach LeBeauf’s inappropriate sexual harassment and the backlash from ignoring his advances. As a result, Tate contacted PJC’s president, Dr. Pam Anglin, to report Coach LeBeauf’s inappropriate behavior. When Tate spoke with Dr. Anglin, it was clear Coach LeBeauf received prior notification of the meeting against Tate’s wishes. Dr. Anglin told Tate she knew Coach LeBeauf might have sent her some inappropriate messages but she should not be concerned. Although Tate told Dr. Anglin she was Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 3
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 4 aware of his past with PJC players and his interaction with her made her fearful and uncomfortable, Dr. Anglin told her not to worry. Dr. Anglin assured Tate that Coach LeBeauf was not a threat and, as in her own experience, sometimes men will flirt and harass you in the “real world” and that Tate should learn to deal with it. Dr. Anglin later admitted that complaints like this against Coach LeBeauf had happened many times before and she was willing to do whatever was necessary to “make this go away.” 12. As a result of Dr. Anglin’s dismissive attitude, Coach LeBeauf retaliated against Tate, further exacerbating an already hostile environment in the women’s basketball program. Coach LeBeauf intimidated Tate, threatened to take away her scholarship, and even refused to allow the school to pay for injuries she sustained in a basketball game earlier that semester. This ordeal forced Tate to lose her scholarship, her opportunity to finish school at PJC, and irreparable mental and emotional distress. IV. CLAIMS COUNT 1: TITLE IX VIOLATION 13. Tate incorporates by reference all of the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 12 as if fully set forth at this point herein. 14. In violation of Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.), Coach LeBeauf’s discriminatory actions against Tate constituted coach-on-student quid pro quo sexual harassment which created a hostile environment for her and others within the PJC women’s basketball program. Tate was (1) a student at an educational institution receiving federal funds; (2) she was subjected to harassment based on her sex; (3) the harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile (or abusive) environment in an Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 4
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 5 educational program or activity; and (4) there is a basis for imputing liability to the institution. When Tate rejected Coach LeBeauf’s advances and complained about his unlawful sexual harassment, Coach LeBeauf, PJC, and Dr. Anglin retaliated against Tate forcing Tate to lose her scholarship. PJC and Dr. Anglin had actual knowledge of Coach LeBeauf’s sexual harassment and acted with deliberate indifference to the misconduct and did not institute corrective measures. 15. As a direct and proximate result of PJC’s, Dr. Anglin’s, and Coach LeBeauf’s conduct as set forth herein, Tate has suffered actual and compensatory damages, including, but not limited to, loss of scholarship, loss of enjoyment of life, pain, suffering, inconvenience, and mental anguish. Tate will show that PJC’s, Dr. Anglin’s, and Coach LeBeauf’s conduct as alleged herein was intentional and PJC, Dr. Anglin, and Coach LeBeauf acted with malice and/or reckless indifference further entitling Tate to compensatory and punitive damages. COUNT 2: § 1983 CLAIM FOR SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND RETALIATION 16. Tate incorporates by reference all of the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 15 as if fully set forth at this point herein. 17. The sexual harassment and retaliation suffered by Tate as set forth in the foregoing section constitutes a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in that PJC, Dr. Anglin, and Coach LeBeauf violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 18. As a direct and proximate result of PJC’s, Dr. Anglin’s, and Coach LeBeauf’s conduct as set forth herein, Tate has suffered actual and compensatory damages, including, but not limited to, loss of scholarship, loss of enjoyment of life, pain, suffering, inconvenience, and mental anguish. Tate will show that PJC’s, Dr. Anglin’s, and Coach LeBeauf’s conduct as Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 5
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 6 alleged herein was intentional and PJC, Dr. Anglin, and Coach LeBeauf acted with malice and/or reckless indifference further entitling Tate to compensatory and punitive damages. V. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT 19. Tate incorporates by reference all of the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 18 as if fully set forth at this point herein. 20. All conditions precedent to Tate’s recovery has been performed, have occurred, or have been waived. VI. ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 21. Tate incorporates by reference all of the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 20 as if fully set forth at this point herein. 22. In addition to actual, compensatory, and punitive damages, Tate seeks to recover her reasonable and necessary attorneys’ fees and costs, including reasonable expert witness fees, as permitted under Title VII and/or 42 U.S.C. § 1988. VII. JURY DEMAND 23. Tate hereby demands trial by jury. VIII. PRAYER WHEREFORE, Tate requests that Defendants be cited to appear and answer, and that on final trial by jury, Tate have and recover from Defendants as follows: (1) actual, compensatory, and exemplary damages; (2) pre- and post judgment interest at the highest rates Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 6
  • ORIGINAL COMPLAINT PAGE 7 allowed by law; (3) attorney’s fees; (4) costs of Court; and (5) such other relief, at law or in equity, to which Tate may be justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, _________________________________ NELLIE G. HOOPER State Bar No. 00798211 JEFFREY D. SMITH State Bar No. 24063008 BLANSCET HOOPER & HALE, L.L.P. 14285 Midway Road, Suite 400 Addison, Texas 75001 (214) 764-7973 (214) 764-7981 (Telecopy) And DAVID R. GIBSON State Bar No. 07861220 VALERIE L. NORRIS Valerie L. Norris State Bar No. 24073225 1801 North Hampton Road, Suite 370 DeSoto, Texas 75115 (972) 291-9300 (972) 291-0636 (Telecopy) ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF Case 4:13-cv-00737-RAS-DDB Document 1 Filed 12/13/13 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 7
Fly UP