Critical Background – Attempt to Settle Memo (2) Summary of Allegations

This summary relates to the originial allegations anticipated but which were modified somewhat in both the Original and Revised Complaints

The gravamen of our allegations is that, as a result of malice and/or malfeasance, Ms. English, Head of the Archer School for Girls, unnecessarily and unlawfully transformed a simple disciplinary issue concerning a momentary and minor act of rudeness by a graduating senior (C1)[2] into a pretext to remove C1 from her school and activities during her final semester and force her totally innocent, openly gay 15 year-old sister (C2) to find and adjust to a new school.

In the course of wreaking this havoc, Ms. English intentionally inflicted emotional distress on C1, C2 and the Josephsons and unlawfully coerced compliance with arbitrary and capricious edicts, alienated the affections of C1, interfered with and damaged the Josephsons relationships with members of the Archer community, defamed Mr. Josephson, violated Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and Family Educational Rights Act (FERPA) laws by revealing private and protected information to select board members, and continually defamed Mr. Josephson

Whether these actions were the result of malice in an effort to settle an old score with Mr. Josephson or simply the result of bad judgment, Archer, the BOT, Ms. English and complicit board members are liable for compensatory and punitive damages.

Believing she has been given the unfettered discretion by the Archer Handbook and enrollment agreement and the BOT, Ms. English claimed and exercised the right to nullify Archer’s tradition of collaboration with parents and the pursuit of non-coercive discipline, Ms. English ignore the advice of other administrators, disregard the wishes and ardent efforts of C1 and C2’s parents to find more effective and less damaging alternatives to achieve Archer’s disciplinary objectives, and spurn the warning of a mental health professional that the course of conduct she was pursuing would inflict serious and lasting emotional distress on a 17 year-old girl who, in a momentary emotional outburst, was rude to her math teacher .

The second major event concerns the exclusion of C2 from the Archer community based on the unsupported defamatory claims of Ms. English that, in the course of advocating for C1, Michael Josephson refused to follow rules and policies pronounced by Ms. English, and otherwise acted so outrageously that Ms. English was justified in preventing C2 from completing her education at Archer.[3]

In her efforts to demonstrate the high cost of dissent, to deter resistance, and to further her personal agenda of inflicting punishment on Michael Josephson (as retaliation for previous conduct she construed as a challenge to her authority), Ms. English consistently rejected conciliatory strategies and, instead, chose drastic options certain to create acrimony and inflict severe emotional trauma and other forms of damage on the Josephsons and their children.

All the misconduct embraced in our allegations was the proximate result of the Board’s failure to exercise due care and oversight to provide guidance regarding the proper use of discretion by Ms. English.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *