[ad_1]
ST. LOUIS • The mother of a 16-year-old boy from Horton's Ladton Watkins High School sued the district in court because his son was not part of the football team.
The woman, named Jane Doe in the court documents, filed suit in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri last week. His father-in-law and his father-in-law, a lawyer in charge of the case, want a judge to make a temporary prohibition order against the district and place him in the district. junior football team.
The woman confided that her son, a high school student who had played football as a joint venture for Ladue last year, had tried to be part of the football team in August. He did not make the university team.
The family accepts this, but they are unhappy that he has not been appointed to the junior college team. The family says that they were told that juniors are not put in a joint venture; the district gives preference to JV to freshmen and sophomores who have more years to hone their skills.
The family says that it is an age discrimination.
The district traditionally allows junior women to play in the girls' co-girls team, depending on the costume. The boy's family says that it is not a fair treatment of the sexes.
"We do not say let him go to school, we never said it," said the father-in-law. "We're just saying put it on junior college."
After a hearing on Friday, both parties are awaiting a decision by District Court Judge John A. Ross. The judge told the lawyers that he would decide on Monday.
The boy's father-in-law said the problem went beyond Ladue.
"Many schools across the country have this policy that wants to be university or that we are excluded from the program," he said. "And it's an illegal policy.If someone said," Cut all blacks, "it would be illegal, and it's illegal also for age."
Not allowed to be in a team, says the district
Celynda Brasher, the chief counsel of the Ladue School District, declined to comment. She said the district's policy is not to talk about ongoing litigation.
However, when filing the complaint in court, the district declared that the boy had not been reinstated in a joint venture because "it was not preferable for the competitive development of the players or the program ". The district also says that being part of a sports team is a privilege and not a right for students. Students do not have the constitutional right to be part of a team, says the district.
"There is no evidence that the decision was based on the age of the students or that it was otherwise unfair," said Derrick Wallace, director of student services for Ladue Schools. in a letter filed in court.
The lawsuit also alleges that Dave Aronberg, the head coach of football, favored students who attended his summer camps and paid him compensation, which, according to the lawsuit, would be a ploy "fee".
The district indicates that all those attending the volunteer camp of the coach (18 sessions at $ 15 per session) have not formed a football team. In fact, according to the district, seven students formed a team without having participated in the summer camps.
In his court file, the boy's mother asked the judge for permission to identify his son under the pseudonym of John Doe because, "by challenging the actions of a popular coach" she feared that his son would be harassed and harassed if people knew him. real name. Post-Dispatch does not appoint his father-in-law, a trial attorney, as he would identify the teenager.
"He was told to get dressed"
The boy did not make any team as a rookie, said the father-in-law. He said that the family was not complaining then. "We told him to keep playing," said the lawyer. "He had to develop his game."
The family hired a private coach for the boy, he joined a St. Louis club team and he improved, said his father-in-law. Last year, he was one of the top scorers at the junior university. The father-in-law said that he was going to file the documents of the court under seal, naming the other players who made the university "with much worse statistics" than the boy who was cut.
The coach told the boy's father-in-law, in an e-mail filed in court, that 40 students were trying to get 24 positions within the university. The coach praised John Doe's maturity and said the boy was "on target," the coach said. He had impressive football attributes, such as "his offensive mentality and his speed in a straight line".
However, the coach went on to say that the boy had "some holes in his game", including technical abilities, and that other kids had better skills and a "football IQ".
The father-in-law said that the coach's decision had left the boy humiliated.
"Everyone has the impression that he is a bad player and that we are a group of crybabies," said the father-in-law. "But no, he had a successful season last year and according to the statistics, he should have made a career in academia.This complaint concerns Ladue's refusal to abide by the law with respect to discrimination based on age. "
The family first appealed the coach's decision to the district administrators, who sided with the coach. The family then appealed to the superintendent, who also sided with the coach. The family then lodged a complaint with the Civil Rights Bureau of the Ministry of Education, but this one could not force the school to put the boy in a team. Then the family turned to the federal court.
The father-in-law is one of the two lawyers who lodged a complaint. He said his company had already raised about $ 100,000 in legal fees since he was working on this case since August. The football season is half finished.
[ad_2]
Source link
