Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cole V Cobb County
Cole V Cobb County
Cole V Cobb County
BONNIE COLE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) CIVIL ACTION
v. ) FILE NO. 1:17-cv-01378-WMR
)
COBB COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT,)
)
Defendant. )
)
)
ORDER
This case came before the Court on March 15, 2019 for oral argument on
Defendant Cobb County School District’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 54].
Having considered the Motion, arguments of counsel, and all appropriate matters of
record, the Court rules that the Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 54] is
DENIED for the reasons and authority stated in Plaintiff’s responsive brief [Doc.
55].
______________________________
WILLIAM M. RAY, II
United States District Judge
Northern District of Georgia
1
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 1 of 27
BONNIE COLE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
CIVIL ACTION FILE NO.
)
COBB COUNTY SCHOOL ) 1:17-cv-1378-WMR
DISTRICT and CHRIS RAGSDALE, )
Individually and in his capacity as ) JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
Superintendent of COBB COUNTY )
SCHOOL DISTRICT, )
)
Defendants. )
administrator in the Cobb County School District. Until 2016, she was the
and Ms. Cole began to use “brain-based mindfulness” techniques to help students
religious “rancor” occurred when certain parents and teachers began to voice
religious objections to the mindfulness activities, and demanded that Ms. Cole
1
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 2 of 27
neutral and explaining to these objectors the secular purpose of the mindfulness
explanation, sending her to a different school many miles away. By doing so,
and religious disapproval of Ms. Cole. She has suffered professionally and
personally as a result.
held responsible for its unconstitutional acts: (1) that Ms. Cole does not have
standing to sue, despite the fact that she clearly suffered as a result of Defendant’s
actions; (2) that Ms. Cole cannot show a basis to hold Defendant liable under
Monell v. Department of Human Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978), even though the
record is clear that Defendant’s final policymaking authority (the Cobb County
“disruption” cause by the religious outcry; and (3) that Ms. Cole cannot establish
the expense of Ms. Cole. As set forth below, Defendant’s arguments are without
2
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 3 of 27
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff incorporates, in their entirety as if set forth fully herein, each of her
statements of material fact and responses to the statements of material fact filed by
I. Standard of Review
any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving
party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S.
317, 322-23 (1986); Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). In considering the motion for summary
judgment filed by Defendant, “the judge’s function is not … to weigh the evidence
and determine the truth of the matter but to determine whether there is a genuine
issue for trial.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242, 249 (1986). “The court
must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmovant and may not weigh
evidence or make credibility determinations, which are jury functions, not those of
a judge.” Feliciano v. City of Miami Beach, 707 F.3d 1244, 1252 (11th Cir. 2013).
1
These include: (1) Plaintiff’s Statement of Additional Undisputed Material Facts
as to Which There is no Genuine Issue to be Tried, submitted in support of
Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 55-1);
and (2) Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Statement of Undisputed Material
Facts as to Which there is No Genuine Issue to be Tried (Doc. 55-2).
3
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 4 of 27
Ms. Cole filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983, asserting a claim of
motivated request of one side in that dispute. Defendant claims that Ms. Cole (1)
does not have standing to sue, (2) cannot establish a basis to hold Defendant liable
for its actions, and (3) cannot establish a violation of the Constitution. Each of
and the presence of genuine issues of material fact requiring a jury, summary
judgment must therefore be denied to Defendant, and Ms. Cole’s claim allowed to
proceed to trial.
II. Bonnie Cole Suffered an “Injury in Fact” and has Standing to Bring her
Claims against Defendant.
Bonnie Cole has standing to assert her claim because CCSD’s promotion of
the religious viewpoint of a group of parents violated her fundamental rights and
caused her actual harm. To establish standing, a plaintiff seeking to invoke this
Court’s jurisdiction bears the burden of demonstrating: (1) an injury in fact; (2) a
causal connection between the injury and the alleged misconduct; and (3) a
behalf of E.P. v. Sch. Bd. of Broward Cty., Fla., 879 F.3d 1274, 1281 (11th Cir.
2018). Defendant argues only that Ms. Cole cannot show an “injury in fact,” and
does not address the issues of causation or redressability. Doc. 54-2, pp. 4-7. As
discussed below, Defendant’s assertion is without merit, as Ms. Cole can show that
It is true that, in order to have standing, a Plaintiff must claim more than a
v. Americans United for Separation of Church & State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 485
Liberties Union of Georgia v. Rabun Cty. Chamber of Commerce, Inc., 698 F.2d
1098, 1104 (11th Cir. 1983) (emphasis added) (citations and internal punctuation
omitted).
On the other hand, a plaintiff has standing to bring suit if she is personally
“directly affected by the laws and practices against whom their complaints are
action, or comes “into direct contact with the offensive conduct.” Saladin v. City of
Milledgeville, 812 F.2d 687, 692 (11th Cir. 1987); Sch. Dist. of Abington Twp., Pa.
v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 225, fn. 9 (1963) (where a party is “directly affected by
5
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 6 of 27
the laws and practices against which their complaints are directed,” such interests
show “proof that particular religious freedoms are infringed” in order to establish
standing to challenge state action under the Establishment Clause. Id. If the
her fundamental right to be free from such establishment—she can assert a claim,
even if only for nominal damages. See Bats v. Cobb Cty., GA, 495 F. Supp. 2d
1311, 1319 (N.D. Ga. 2007) (“a plaintiff who vindicates a right under
the Establishment Clause, but does not demonstrate actual injury, is entitled to an
award of nominal damages); Selman v. Cobb Cty. Sch. Dist., No. 1:02-CV-2325-
CC, 2005 WL 8157364, at *1 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 24, 2005) (ordering an award of
unconstitutional government action can establish that she was personally affected
by that action. Ass'n of Data Processing Serv. Organizations, Inc. v. Camp, 397
U.S. 150, 154 (1970) (“[s]he who is likely to be financially injured may be a
reliable private attorney general to litigate the issues of the public interest”)
(internal punctuation and citations omitted). However, the Supreme Court also
6
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 7 of 27
confer standing.” A.C.L.U. of GA v. Rabun Cty. C.O.C., 698 F.2d at 1104 (citing
(SCRAP), 412 U.S. 669, 686 (1973) (standing “not confined to those who could
show economic harm”); Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Envtl. Study Grp., Inc., 438
emotional distress. Akouri v. State of Fla. Dep't of Transp., 408 F.3d 1338, 1345
constitutional claims). Such damages can also include damage to reputation. Berry
v. Bank of Am., N.A., No. 18-CV-60722, 2018 WL 3126218, at *2 (S.D. Fla. June
26, 2018) (“Plaintiffs allege that they sustained damage to their reputation—
Finally, this Circuit has recognized that a public employee who is transferred
for an unconstitutional purpose has a cognizable claim, even where the transfer
7
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 8 of 27
does not include a salary decrease. See McCabe v. Sharrett, 12 F.3d 1558, 1564
(11th Cir. 1994) (finding a cognizable claim where an employee was transferred
even though her salary did not decrease), citing Rutan v. Republican Party of
Illinois, 497 U.S. 62, 73 (1990) (observing that “[e]mployees who find themselves
are “employees denied transfers” for unconstitutional purposes). In this way, the
grounds has a cognizable claim.” Perrea v. Cincinnati Pub. Sch., 709 F. Supp. 2d
628, 641 (S.D. Ohio 2010), citing Boger v. Wayne Cty., 950 F.2d 316, 321–22,
324–26 (6th Cir.1991); Ridpath v. Bd. of Governors Marshall Univ., 447 F.3d 292,
316 (4th Cir. 2006) (“With regard to the retaliation claim, a public employer
transfer, recall, and hiring based on the exercise of” that employee's
Boger:
950 F.2d at 321. 2 Thus “an employer possessing [complete discretion to transfer an
employee from one position to another position within the same class] may not
transfer an employee for reasons that infringe upon rights guaranteed by the United
of some parents in her school. Saladin v. City of Milledgeville, 812 F.2d at 692;
Sch. Dist. of Abington Twp., Pa. v. Schempp, 374 U.S. at 225. First of all, CCSD
2
These rulings are consistent with the numerous rulings in this Circuit that
an involuntary transfer, even without economic damages, may constitute an
adverse employment action in the context of Title VII or similar claims. See, e.g.,
Peterson v. Corr. Corp. of Am., No. 5:14CV265-MW/CJK, 2015 WL 5698501, at
*5 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 28, 2015) (noting in a Title VII retaliation case, that the
plaintiff's transfer “to the undesirable night shift, standing alone, could dissuade a
reasonable employee from engaging in protected activity and thus constitute an
adverse employment action”); Dinkins v. Charoen Pokphand USA, Inc., 133 F.
Supp. 2d 1254, 1264 (M.D. Ala. 2001) (“a significant change in employment can
occur regardless of whether the individual retains the same salary and benefits”).
However, in the constitutional context, “adverse employment actions” are more
broadly defined than in the Title VII context, including any action that is “likely to
chill” the exercise of a fundamental right. McCabe, 12 F.3d at 1563; Goffer v.
Marbury, 956 F.2d 1045, 1049 (11th Cir. 1992).
9
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 10 of 27
cannot dispute that Ms. Cole was transferred, and an unconstitutional transfer itself
may be the basis of a cognizable claim. McCabe 12 F.3d at 1564; Rutan, 497 U.S.
at 73; Boger v. Wayne Cty., 950 F.2d at 321–22, 324–26 Ridpath v. Bd. of
Governors Marshall Univ., 447 F.3d at 316. Consequently, even if she were unable
to establish actual damages, she could still seek an award of nominal damages for
the County’s transferring her for an unconstitutional reason. Bats v. Cobb Cty., GA,
495 F. Supp. 2d at 1319; Selman v. Cobb Cty. Sch. Dist., 2005 WL 8157364, at *1;
Stachura, 477 U.S. 299, 304-307. She thus has standing to sue. Id.; Saladin, 812
Ms. Cole has also established that she suffered actual harm in the form of
economic damages. Data Processing Serv. Org. v. Camp, 397 U.S. 150, 154. Her
commute was extended to “two and a half to three times” the distance she
previously traveled, adding two hours of time to her daily commute. (Plaintiff’s
Statement of Additional Material Facts (“SAMF”), ¶65.) Her work hours are also
extended an “additional two to three hours” due to additional work that must be
performed at her new school. (SAMF ¶66.) This additional commute and work
time has deprived Ms. Cole of her professional opportunities, as she had to shutter
a growing Reiki practice at Breath of Life due to the additional restrictions on her
10
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 11 of 27
Ms. Cole has also established through her testimony that she suffered
GA v. Rabun Cty. C.O.C., 698 F.2d at 1104; Valley Forge, 454 U.S. at 486. Akouri
v. State of Fla. Dep't of Transp., 408 F.3d at 1345. The fact that CCSD not only
refused to support her in the face of baseless religious complaints, but in fact sided
with those making the complaints to her detriment, critically damaged her
reputation and was viewed as a tacit confirmation that she had done something
inappropriate—which she had not. (SAMF ¶60.) The emotional damages Ms. Cole
experienced as a consequence were severe. She stated that when she found out
about her transfer “an hour before the board meeting,” she was “in a state of
shock” and emotional turmoil,” and suffered from a “broken heart.” (SAMF ¶61.)
She suffered panic attacks and mood swings, “[cried] all day,” and “would flip out
at random moments.” (SAMF ¶62.) She began to see a counselor, and began taking
Klonopin and Xanax for her mental distress. (SAMF ¶63.) Eventually, her doctor
suggested that she take FMLA leave for the remainder of the school year in order
to deal with the stress of the situation, which she did. (SAMF ¶64.)
Thus, Ms. Cole has established not only that she was transferred—which
itself provides standing to sue—but that her transfer resulted in both economic and
11
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 12 of 27
right. She has thus established (1) that she suffered an injury in fact (her transfer
and the resulting economic, professional, and emotional damages), (2) that the
some community members) caused her injury; and (3) that she is therefore entitled
unconstitutional state establishment of religion, but also for her actual economic
and noneconomic damages resulting therefrom. Broward Cty., 879 F.3d at 1281;
Valley Forge, 454 U.S. at 485; Rabun Cty., 698 F.2d at 1104. Defendant’s claim
that she does not have standing to sue is therefore without merit, and this Court
III. Defendant May Be Held Liable for its Decision to Transfer Bonnie
Cole under Monell.3
that “Congress did intend municipalities and other local government units to be
included among those persons to whom § 1983 applies.” Monell v. Dep't of Soc.
Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 690 (1978) (emphasis in original).
Reading the language of §1983 against the legislative history, the Court concluded
3
Plaintiff agrees that, as a matter of state law, the Cobb County School Board is
the final policymaking authority with respect to employment decisions made by the
Cobb County School District. O.C.G.A. § 20-2-211.
12
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 13 of 27
officially adopted and promulgated by that body's officers,” a local governing body
The Supreme Court has since recognized that “Monell's language makes
clear that it expressly envisioned other officials ‘whose acts or edicts may fairly be
said to represent official policy,’ Monell, supra, 436 U.S., at 694, and whose
decisions therefore may give rise to municipal liability under § 1983.” Pembaur v.
City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469, 480 (1986), In overruling the 6th Circuit’s
under Monell, The Court stated that a single decision, “tailored to a particular
situation and not intended to control decisions in later situations,” still constitutes
4
In addition, local governing bodies “may be sued for constitutional deprivations
visited pursuant to governmental “custom” even though such a custom has not
received formal approval through the body's official decision making channels.”
Id. at 690-91. However, despite Defendant’s straw-man argument to the contrary,
Ms. Cole has never argued that her rights were violated due to a “custom” of the
Cobb County School Board, but because of its decision to transfer her to quell
religious unrest in the community. [Doc. 11.] There is no requirement that a
Plaintiff establish existence of a “custom” where she complains of a specific
unlawful decision instead. Brown v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 923 F.2d 1474, 1481
(11th Cir. 1991) (“if plaintiff succeeds in proving a city policy of discrimination
based on the actions of a “final policymaker,” he would have no need to prove in
addition a custom or practice”).
13
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 14 of 27
an act of official policy “[i]f the decision to adopt that particular course of action is
decision and the basis for it, their ratification would be chargeable to the
municipality because their decision is final.” City of St. Louis v. Praprotnik, 485
action under Monell (a legal question for the Court) is separate from the issue of
whether the municipality is ultimately liable (that is, whether the complained-of
action is actually unlawful—a question for the jury). See Monell, 436 U.S. at 713-
714 (ruling only on the question of the potential liability of a municipality and
school board, not on whether the complained-of act was unconstitutional); see also
Pembaur, 475 U.S. 469 (ruling only on the question of “whether, and in what
subject the municipality to liability, and not discussing the the constitutionality of
the complained-of action); Praprotnik, 485 U.S. 112 (ruling only to “define the
14
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 15 of 27
U.S.C. § 1983,” not on the constitutionality of the underlying action); Doe v. Sch.
Bd. of Broward Cty., Fla., 604 F.3d 1248, 1267 (11th Cir. 2010) (noting that the
Court of Appeals “need not reach” the question of a constitutional violation where
the predicate issue of §1983 liability was already decided); Scala v. City of Winter
Park, 116 F.3d 1396, 1403 (11th Cir. 1997) (ruling only on the question of Monell
Mandel v. Doe, 888 F.2d 783, 793 (11th Cir. 1989) (“Only after this determination
is made is the second step of the inquiry relevant: Did the challenged decision or
act of the official cause the deprivation of the plaintiff's rights? The answer to this
Thus, in order to establish the possibility of liability under Monell, Ms. Cole
need only show that the act of which she complains was a decision taken by the
Cobb County School Board as final policymaker. Monell, 436 U.S. 658. She may
decision and the basis for it[.]”Praprotnik, 485 U.S. at 127. Having done so, Ms.
Cole will have satisfied Monell and its progeny’s requirements as to potential
liability; she may then establish that liability by showing that the decision and basis
for it were unconstitutional. Id.; see Mandel v. Doe, 888 F.2d at 793 (stating that
15
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 16 of 27
Here, the record is clear that the Cobb County School Board approved both
the decision to transfer Ms. Cole and basis for that decision, both of which were
John Adams. As Mr. Adams testified, he and Dr. Rivera “came up with the
(SAMF ¶43.) Before presenting this decision to the Board, Adams’ office
generated a “personnel report that goes to the Board that lists transfers, people that
go on leave, et cetera. Sometimes that’s 15, even 30 pages.” (SAMF ¶44.) He also
generated a “shorter executive session personnel report” which specifically lists the
names of assistant principals and principals who are being transferred. (SAMF
¶45.) Adams testified that he always “meets with Mr. Ragsdale prior to a board
meeting and go[es] over the personnel report with him. But typically, Mr. Ragsdale
looks at it and then puts it down, and we tend to talk about other things…He is
very hands off on personnel…I can’t recall a time when he has overruled one.”
(SAMF ¶46.) This shorter list of assistant principals and principals was then
(SAMF ¶47.) The Board then votes to approve the list of personnel changes
Bonnie Cole in that because the Board had received communication from the
16
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 17 of 27
community” and that Adams “referenced, you know, the situation going on at the
school.” (SAMF ¶49.) Ragsdale further testified that Adams said something along
the lines of “as the board, you know, is probably aware, many of you have gotten
emails about the situation going on at the school. Ms. Cole is the assistant principal
¶51.) As Ragsdale admitted, the board then approved the transfer of Ms. Cole
The Board’s vote to approve Adams and Ragsdale’s transfer of Ms. Cole
Praprotnik, 485 U.S. at 127 (approval of a subordinate's decision “and the basis for
it” constitutes a “decision” for Monell purposes). The Board was presented with
the basis for the decision, which was the “disruption” caused by the religious
(SAMF ¶53.) The Board therefore also approved the “basis” of the decision.
Praprotnik, 485 U.S. at 127. Clearly, a majority of the Board voted for the action,
as the transfer then occurred. (SAMF ¶54.) This vote constituted a “decision” for
17
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 18 of 27
held liable. Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. at 480; Monell, 436 U.S. at
713-714; Mandel v. Doe, 888 F.2d at 793. Ms. Cole has therefore established a
basis for holding Defendant liable for her §1983 claims. Id. 5
establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ....” U.S. Const.
Amend. I. This mandate extends to state and local governments through the
5
Smith v. Cobb County School District, No. 1:10-CV-848-TWT, 2013 WL
4028856 (N.D. Ga. Aug. 7, 2013), cited at length by Defendant, has no bearing on
this case. Smith concerned a plaintiff who argued that the Cobb County School
Board had a “custom” of “rubber-stamping” employment decisions made by
subordinate employees, including the superintendent, such that those employees
were in fact the “final policy makers” who could subject the School District to
liability. Id. at *3-4. This Court disagreed, ruling correctly that the School Board
had “final policymaking authority” as to employment decisions under state law,
and concluding that the record showed that the Board had taken steps to ensure that
its decision was not being made on an unlawful retaliatory basis. Id. at *4-5. In
contrast, in this case, the record is clear that the Board voted to transfer Ms. Cole
after being presented with the decision and basis for that decision (to quell
religiously-motivated “disruptions”) by Adams and Ragsdale. See Infra p. 15.
Regardless of how Board members themselves might have testified when deposed,
the record is clear that they were presented with and considered a specific rationale
for the transfer and decided to take action based on that presentation. Id. Thus,
beyond the fact that Ms. Cole does not assert the existence of a “custom,” but
claims a specific decision by the Board violated her constitutional rights, Smith’s
holding does not preclude a finding for Ms. Cole on Monell liability.
18
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 19 of 27
While the Constitution does not guarantee that a School Board can always
avoid conflict with respect to religious controversies, it does require that the Board
remain neutral in the face of such controversies. Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602,
622, 91 S. Ct. 2105, 2116, 29 L. Ed. 2d 745 (1971) (“Ordinarily political debate
and division, however vigorous or even partisan, are normal and healthy
Comm'rs of Mobile Cty., 827 F.2d 684, 689 (11th Cir. 1987) (“The religion clauses
of the first amendment require that states “pursue a course of complete neutrality
toward religion.”) Thus, no State can “pass laws which aid one religion” or that
“prefer one religion over another.” Everson v. Bd. of Ed. of Ewing Twp., 330 U.S.
was intended to erect a wall of separation between Church and State.” Id. (internal
McCreary County, Ky. v. ACLU of Ky., 545 U.S. 844, 860, 125 S.Ct. 2722, 162
L.Ed.2d 729 (2005) (“When the government acts with the ostensible and
Clause value of official religious neutrality, there being no neutrality when the
19
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 20 of 27
particular government action, Courts are to look at three criteria: “[f]irst, the statute
must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must
be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not
foster “an excessive government entanglement with religion.” Smith v. Bd. of Sch.
Comm'rs of Mobile Cty., 827 F.2d 684, 689 (11th Cir. 1987) (citing Lemon v.
prong of the Lemon test asks whether government's actual purpose is to endorse or
question should render the challenged practice invalid.” Wallace v. Jaffree, 472
U.S. 38, 56 (1985) (quoting Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668, 690 (1984) (J.
state with a religion, or with religion in general, or when the effect of the
Defendant claims that its decision to transfer Ms. Cole “was based entirely
20
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 21 of 27
Bullard Elementary,” and argues that this disruption was not based on any
“religious” grounds. [Doc. 54-2, p. 17.] This assertion ignores the fact that the
(SAMF ¶¶25-39.)
In early 2016, Adams learned that certain religious parents at Bullard were
in uproar over the use of mindfulness activities at Bullard, which they claimed
offended their religious beliefs. (SAMF ¶¶25-29, 32.) Adams also learned that
community members were having prayer meetings, including one where a group
converged on Bullard Elementary School and laid their hands on Bonnie Cole’s
office windows. (SAMF ¶32.) Multiple emails sent to both Ragsdale and Adams
expressed, in vehement terms, religious concerns that Ms. Cole was teaching
activity” and demanding that Ms. Cole “resign or be terminated.” (SAMF ¶¶25-
33.) Soon thereafter, Mr. Adams attended a “Coffee and Conversation” meeting
(SAMF ¶¶34-39.) Following that meeting, Adams received an email from a parent
in attendance at that meeting, which stated “with the focus now being on how we
as a school community move forward and heal the divisions, I think it is going to
be very difficult for that to happen with parents and staff as she is still an
21
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 22 of 27
administrator at the school." (SAMF ¶39.) Adams then responded to this parent,
praising his “reasonable, balanced perspective” and stating that “we are indeed
continuing to closely monitor, review, and discuss the matter at the executive
cabinet level and will take any additional action as may be needed." (SAMF ¶40.)
Adams testified that “[g]iven what I saw at the coffee meeting, town hall, given
that the level of rancor and disruption that occurred… her continued presence at
recommended her transfer to Ragsdale. (SAMF ¶42.) Later, Adams submitted the
decision and his rationale for it to the Board of Education, which approved it.
(SAMF ¶43-54.)
minority of even those who attended the “Coffee and Conversation” meeting—
demanded that Ms. Cole “resign or be terminated” or expressed concerns that her
continued presence at the school would inhibit healing. (SAMF ¶56.) Many parents
and staff loved Ms. Cole and wanted her to stay. (SAMF ¶57.) In fact, Bullard’s
Principal, Dr. Patrice Moore, testified that she believed the transfer to be
counterproductive in moving the community towards healing, and believed that the
22
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 23 of 27
community dispute, it would not have violated Ms. Cole’s constitutional rights.
Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. at 622; Smith v. Bd. of Sch. Comm'rs, 827 F.2d at
689. Instead, Defendant chose to assent to the demands made of it by one side in a
the religious group’s cause and agreement with that groups “disapproval” of Ms.
Cole. Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. at 56. In other words, Defendant failed to
CONCLUSION
Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment must be denied because (1) Ms.
Cole has demonstrated that she has standing to sue because she was personally
(2) she has established a basis to hold Defendant liable under Monell; and (3)
because the evidence reflects that the effect of Defendant’s transfer of Ms. Cole at
24
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 25 of 27
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing has been prepared in the Times New
25
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 26 of 27
BONNIE COLE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
CIVIL ACTION FILE NO.
)
COBB COUNTY SCHOOL ) 1:17-cv-1378-WMR
DISTRICT and CHRIS RAGSDALE, )
Individually and in his capacity as ) JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
Superintendent of COBB COUNTY )
SCHOOL DISTRICT, )
)
Defendants. )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
system which will automatically send email notification of such filing to the
26
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55 Filed 02/12/19 Page 27 of 27
27
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 1 of 21
BONNIE COLE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
CIVIL ACTION FILE NO.
)
COBB COUNTY SCHOOL ) 1:17-cv-1378-WMR
DISTRICT and CHRIS RAGSDALE, )
Individually and in his capacity as ) JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
Superintendent of COBB COUNTY )
SCHOOL DISTRICT, )
)
Defendants. )
the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Cobb County School
1
All depositions, affidavits, and exhibits cited herein are filed in their entirety in
support of Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition to the Defendant’s Motion for
Summary Judgment.
1
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 2 of 21
Bonnie Cole was well respected by her Principal, Dr. Patrice Moore, who
stated that she was a “good assistant principal,” “was very relational,” and that Dr.
2.
Dr. Moore also stated that prior to 2015-2016, she had received no
complaints at all from other parents of Bullard students, and in fact had received
3.
for Defendant (hereinafter, “Adams”), testified that “Bonnie is a good AP. She was
a good AP,” and also state that “Bonnie has always been not only competent but a
very good AP.” (Deposition of John Adams (“Adams Dep.”) 94:11-12, 139:9-11.)
4.
[take] deep breaths, positive [sic], being positive, and learning how to reduce
2
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 3 of 21
5.
Dr. Moore further testified that “Brain based mindfulness” refers to “[b]rain
compatible in that you -- before starting the next activity, for example, in an
6.
As used by Dr. Moore and Ms. Cole, the term “recenter” simply means “[t]o
refocus.” As Dr. Moore stated, these techniques are useful in an academic setting
elementary level,” and de-stressing activities lets students “get the wiggles, jitters,
all those things, out so they can refocus themselves on whatever task, instructional
7.
In 2014-2015, Ms. Cole and Dr. Moore began offering activities after school
that gave teachers and staff “an opportunity for them to voluntarily come after
Dep. 14:15-21.)
8.
That same year, Dr. Moore turned an empty classroom into “Australia,” a
3
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 4 of 21
room “where teachers could go throughout the day and relax and rejuvenate
9.
contained a refrigerator, “a Keurig, bean bags, soft lighting, music, coloring books,
sand, I mean, anything they could use to relax.” (Moore Dep. 14:22-15:8.)
10.
11.
Although Ms. Cole often led these activities, other teachers also led
12.
13.
Ms. Cole or another teacher would demonstrate the particular mindfulness activity
4
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 5 of 21
14.
sessions where students would “breath like frogs,” play with fidgets, or color, and
used both resources approved by the Cobb County School District P.E. program,
15.
The “GoNoodle” videos contained a monkey that did yoga, and who would
16.
history from like -- I took data from November to March of that year. Had a 33
percent decrease in the number of discipline referrals that teachers were submitting
for students. I had a fifth-grade math -- a teacher in fifth grade who reported that
her math increased, her students were able to function higher in math because she
and tests, and she saw a significant increase in her students' ability to perform as a
result. Teachers reported that they felt less stress. They were able to release some
of the anxiety that they were experiencing that year, so testing was a big stressor
5
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 6 of 21
for the teachers, the amount of testing we were doing with students. And so they
expressed that they felt calmer. We even had parents report that their own personal
children seemed to be able to handle stress better as a result.” (Moore Dep. 26:4-
27:2.)
17.
Dr. Moore and Ms. Cole testified that the brain-based activities used at
Bullard were not religious in any way. (Moore Dep. 19:8-20:12; Cole Dep. 40:5-
9).
18.
Ms. Cole testified that it was “always forefront in [her] mind” to make sure
that the mindfulness activities used with students were not about religion. (Cole
Dep. 127:16-17.)
19.
No one, including Ms. Cole, promoted any business related to “Reiki,” yoga,
20.
6
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 7 of 21
had concluded that Bullard or Ms. Cole were engaging in any religious practice at
21.
the allegations against Ms. Cole and had “no verification” that she was doing
73:2-74:19.)
22.
Rivera testified that “this was not this is not a situation where I'm
and repeatedly stated in an email “we have no evidence this occurred” with
23.
Adams did not conduct any investigation into the mindfulness activities of
Ms. Cole, or whether any of the allegations against her were true. (Adams Dep.
24.
According to both Adams and Rivera, Ms. Cole “didn't do anything that warranted
7
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 8 of 21
25.
In the Spring of 2016, several parents began to send emails to Cobb County
22, 141:8-17; Ragsdale Dep. Exhs. 3, 10, 11, 14, 23; Adams Dep. 55:7-24, 56:13-
22.)
26.
27.
One email stated that Ms. Cole was using “crystals/stones” and teaching
children “how to breath like a dragon,” and stated that “there are cult like practices
28.
Another stated that “we have a very strong Christian Faith, and we pray. My
8
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 9 of 21
child does not need a crystal or stone to protect her from negative energy. She has
the blood of Jesus” and alleging that the mindfulness activities at Bullard have
29.
Another email stated that mindfulness was a “very disturbing activity” with
“religious practice” to “Vice Principal, Bonnie Cole.” (Adams Dep. Ex. 10.)
30.
22.)
31.
Cole, Dr. Moore, and Area Superintendent Dr. Barbara Swinney to place limits
around the school’s mindfulness activities, including ordering Ms. Cole not to lead
classroom lessons on yoga or breathing. (Rivera Dep. 56:14-21; Rivera Dep. Ex. 2;
32.
9
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 10 of 21
community members, including a group called “Moms with Swords,” even had
prayer meetings at the school with the intent to “rid the school of Buddhism.” At
one point a group converged on Bullard Elementary School and laid their hands on
Bonnie Cole’s office windows. [Adams Dep. 58:15-25, 59:8-60:4; Cole Dep.
100:1-101:4.)
33.
Some of the religious objectors began demanding that Ms. Cole “resign or
terminated” reference).)
34.
and Conversation” meeting for the purpose of explaining the mindfulness activities
and how they would be limited to parents, which Adams attended. (Adams Dep.
35.
“GoNoodle,” the fact that the activities did not have any religious purpose or
connotations, and what the school would be doing moving forward. (Moore Dep.
10
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 11 of 21
36.
After Dr. Moore concluded her presentation, some of the parents who had
previously made email complaints stood up and accused Dr. Moore of “not being
truthful” about the practices, calling out Ms. Cole by name and falsely accusing her
37.
complaints about mindfulness were a minority of “five, six, no more than 10”
38.
disagreement with the parents who expressed religious complaints, and at points
39.
attendance at that meeting, which stated “with the focus now being on how we as a
school community move forward and heal the divisions, I think it is going to be
very difficult for that to happen with parents and staff as she is still an
11
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 12 of 21
administrator at the school." [Adams Dep. 125:22-126:6; Adams Dep. Exh. 11.]
40.
perspective” and stating that “we are indeed continuing to closely monitor, review,
and discuss the matter at the executive cabinet level and will take any additional
action as may be needed." [Adams Dep. 126:17-20; Adams Dep. Exh. 13.]
41.
Adams testified that “[g]iven what I saw at the coffee meeting, town hall,
given that the level of rancor and disruption that occurred… her continued presence
42.
Adams then forwarded that email to Rivera and Ragsdale, stating that “we
will need to reassign the AP for next year in order for the school to get past this.”
43.
12
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 13 of 21
44.
“personnel report that goes to the Board that lists transfers, people that go on leave,
45.
specifically lists the names of assistant principals and principals who are being
46.
Adams testified that he always “meet[s] with Mr. Ragsdale prior to a board
meeting and go[es] over the personnel report with him. But typically, Mr. Ragsdale
looks at it and then puts it down, and we tend to talk about other things…He is
very hands off on personnel…I can’t recall a time when he has overruled one.”
47.
This shorter list of assistant principals and principals was then presented to
48.
The Board then voted to approve the list of personnel changes presented to
13
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 14 of 21
49.
have identified Bonnie Cole in that because the Board had received communication
from the community” and that Adams “would have referenced, you know, the
50.
Ragsdale further testified that Adams said something along the lines of “as
the board, you know, is probably aware, many of you have gotten emails about the
situation going on at the school. Ms. Cole is the assistant principal at that particular
51.
52.
As Ragsdale admitted, the board then approved the transfer of Ms. Cole
14
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 15 of 21
53.
The Board was presented with the basis for the decision, which was the
54.
A majority of the Board voted for the action, as the transfer then occurred.
55.
Rivera and Adams told Ms. Cole that she “would not be moved” and that she
had “done nothing wrong”; however, Ms. Cole then received a phone call stating
that she was being moved, without any further explanation. (Cole Dep. 86:13-
87:11, 90:2-91:12.)
56.
minority of even those who attended the “Coffee and Conversation” meeting—
demanded that Ms. Cole “resign or be terminated” or expressed concerns that her
continued presence at the school would inhibit healing. (Moore Dep. 89:1-91:20;
57.
Many parents and staff loved Ms. Cole and expressed that they wanted her
15
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 16 of 21
to stay. (Moore Dep. 101:4-16; Moore Dep. Exh. 48 (composite exhibit of positive
58.
In fact, Bullard’s Principal, Dr. Patrice Moore, testified that she believed the
believed that the transfer to Mableton was unnecessary. (Moore Dep. 102:5-103:2.)
59.
Having been abruptly transferred away from the school that she loved, Ms.
60.
The fact that CCSD not only refused to support her in the face of baseless
religious complaints, but in fact sided with those making the complaints to her
detriment, critically damaged her reputation and tacitly confirmed that she had
61.
She stated that when she found out about her transfer “an hour before the
board meeting,” she was “in a state of shock” and emotional turmoil,” and suffered
62.
16
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 17 of 21
She suffered panic attacks and mood swings, “[cried] all day,” and “would
63.
She began to see a counselor, and began to take Klonopin and Xanax for her
64.
Eventually, her doctor suggested that she take FMLA leave for the
remainder of the school year in order to deal with the stress of the situation, which
65.
Ms. Cole also suffered economic losses, as her commute was extended to
“two and a half to three times” the distance she previously traveled, adding two
66.
Her work hours are also extended an “additional two to three hours” due to
additional work that must be performed at her new school. (Pl. Dep. 108:13-25).
67.
This additional commute and work time has deprived Ms. Cole of her
professional opportunities, as she had to shutter her practice at Breath of Life due
17
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 18 of 21
18
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 19 of 21
Pursuant to Local Rule 5.1, the undersigned counsel hereby certifies that
the foregoing pleading was prepared with one of the font and point selections
19
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 20 of 21
BONNIE COLE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
CIVIL ACTION FILE NO.
)
COBB COUNTY SCHOOL ) 1:17-cv-1378-WMR
DISTRICT and CHRIS RAGSDALE, )
Individually and in his capacity as ) JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
Superintendent of COBB COUNTY )
SCHOOL DISTRICT, )
)
Defendants. )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
CM/ECF system which will automatically send email notification of such filing
20
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-1 Filed 02/12/19 Page 21 of 21
21
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 1 of 20
BONNIE COLE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
CIVIL ACTION FILE NO.
)
COBB COUNTY SCHOOL ) 1:17-cv-1378-WMR
DISTRICT and CHRIS RAGSDALE, )
Individually and in his capacity as ) JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
Superintendent of COBB COUNTY )
SCHOOL DISTRICT, )
)
Defendants. )
REPONSE: Admitted.
1
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 2 of 20
Elementary School (“Bullard”) and stayed in that position until the end of
REPONSE: Admitted.
REPONSE: Admitted.
offering Reiki services to the public under the umbrella of a business called
REPONSE: Admitted.
REPONSE: Admitted.
6. During this time frame, Plaintiff had reached a level three (out
REPONSE: Admitted.
REPONSE: Admitted.
2
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 3 of 20
REPONSE: Admitted.
REPONSE: Admitted.
she implemented at Bullard to have any religious implications. (Pl. Dep. 40:5-9).
REPONSE: Admitted.
26:20-27:18).
REPONSE: Admitted.
REPONSE: Admitted.
3
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 4 of 20
had been adopted and implemented by other schools within the District. (Rivera
REPONSE: Admitted.
practices at Bullard. (Pl. Dep. 41:12-15, 51:3-23, 116: 6-23; Rivera Dep. 38:17-
REPONSE: Admitted.
REPONSE: Admitted.
4
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 5 of 20
inundating CCSD personnel with emails, and leading to Plaintiff feel “very
125:18-126:1).
REPONSE: Admitted.
attention, including on talk shows like “The View.” (Pl. Dep. 81:17-24; Dess
Dec. ¶7).
REPONSE: Admitted.
Human Resources Officer, John Adams, and his team began gathering
into the truth of the complaints occurred; Adams testified that there
5
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 6 of 20
fact, he took them with a “very large grain of salt.” (Adams Dep.
20. Mr. Adams was concerned about staff morale, school climate,
and to what extent there was division amongst Bullard’s staff. (Adams Dep.
77:13- 19).
21. Jeff Dess, a CCSD counselor and licensed psychologist who runs
“reading…on the level of fracture among the staff”, to see if the fracture was
might be able to move forward. (Adams Dep. 78:18-20; Dess Dec. ¶6).
REPONSE: Admitted.
22. Over the course of several weeks Mr. Dess met with Bullard’s
REPONSE: Admitted.
23. Mr. Dess found a systemic loss of trust within the School as
faculty and staff as a result of the issues surrounding the implantation of the
6
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 7 of 20
and staff had chosen sides and were deeply entrenched in their positions. Due
to these issues, there was a core group of staff members who no longer felt safe.
24. Mr. Dess found the situation at Bullard to be one of the most
REPONSE: Admitted.
25. Mr. Dess reported his findings to John Adams and Grant
REPONSE: Admitted.
26. After Mr. Dess’s investigation, Mr. Adams understood that the
staff members at Bullard were generally split “50-50” and that the split likely
he felt the split to be, and Adams’ testimony is that he proposed the 50-
7
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 8 of 20
89:19-91:24.)
Rivera Investigation
Grant Rivera, and his team also began looking into the allegations made by
parents and staff primarily to ensure that Plaintiff was in compliance with
had “no verification” that she was doing anything improper; in fact,
“very noble,” however CCSD’s concern was that Plaintiff was not following
8
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 9 of 20
29. Dr. Rivera also felt that certain elements of the mindfulness
putting your hands in the prayer position, and coloring mandalas - - were, at
least by some, identified with activities and symbols of certain religions such
that she should avoid those elements to avoid any perception that there was a
that Rivera concluded that the religious complaints were true, since he
9
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 10 of 20
30. Dr. Rivera felt that Cole “was giving people enough - - there
was enough meat on the bone, there was just enough sliver there that people
could say, well, that rock is religious, that mandala is religious, that namaste and
REPONSE: Admitted.
CCSD. Instead, it was to make sure that all mindfulness programs were
116:7-9).
staff, Bullard Principal Patrice Moore held a “town hall” meeting at the school
10
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 11 of 20
called “Coffee and Conversations” on March 18, 2016. (Pl. Dep. 60:22-25;
REPONSE: Admitted.
34. The Coffee and Conversations town hall was “standing room
and Conversations town hall was concerning to CCSD. (Adams Dep. 69:24-
70:10).
about the “rancor and disruption,” which was coming from parents
89:25-92:24.)
11
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 12 of 20
implementing any religious based activity at school and complaints that the
mindfulness violated the parent’s own religious beliefs, and secular grounds
based on parents complaining that the mindfulness activities reflected the school
“taking your eyes off the academic ball”. (Dess Dec. ¶11; Adams Dep. 71:2-22).
eyes off the academic ball”; those words are Adams’. The primary
other concerns came into play was a single email that also referenced
religious complaints (for instance, that Ms. Cole was teaching children
about “chakras,” which did not occur). (Adams Dep. Ex. 11.)
Plaintiff that she did not need to be seen by parents in the halls of the school.
12
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 13 of 20
Dep. 72:16-21.)
38. Several parents made clear that they felt it would be very
difficult for the Bullard community to heal and move forward if Plaintiff
REPONSE: Admitted.
REPONSE: Admitted.
40. The Coffee and Conversations town hall made clear to Mr.
Adams that Plaintiff had lost the ability to function at Bullard and that her
Ms. Cole as being at fault for the “rancor and disruption” of certain
evidence that was obtained confirmed that Ms. Cole was simply
“trying to help kids [and staff] relax.” (Adams Dep. 43:25-44:16, 58:1-
13
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 14 of 20
REPONSE: Admitted.
at Bullard Elementary rendered Plaintiff unable to effectively lead her staff and
25).
Denied that Plaintiff caused it. The disruption was caused by the
14
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 15 of 20
59:7- 61:19).
decision that sent Plaintiff to a school of lesser status and damaged her
continued as long as either her (sic) or her principal Dr. Patrice Moore were
been Dr. Moore. Not us together.” This testimony does not indicate
whether she believes that the disruption would have continued as long
as either she or Dr. Moore remained at the school, only that the
15
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 16 of 20
behaviors to her. In fact, the cause of the disruption would not have
45. Plaintiff does not think that she could have returned to Bullard for
the following year, i.e., the 2016/2017 school year. (Pl. Dep. 107:11-15).
Plaintiff’s testimony. Ms. Cole testified that she could not have
religious objections of some parents, but because she felt she “lost
trust in the leadership of the county,” who did not support her there.
REPONSE: Admitted.
47. After learning she was transferred, Plaintiff returned to the School
until Spring Break, but then went on FMLA leave for the rest of the school year
because she “knew [she] was unable to do [her] job effectively.” (Pl. Dep. 97-
16
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 17 of 20
98.)
REPONSE: Admitted.
48. Plaintiff was afraid to go in the hallway because she did not know
REPONSE: Admitted.
49. When Plaintiff was transferred to Mableton she retained the same
job title, salary, and all other benefits. (Pl. Dep. 107:16-20).
REPONSE: Admitted.
17
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 18 of 20
Pursuant to Local Rule 5.1, the undersigned counsel hereby certifies that
the foregoing pleading was prepared with one of the font and point selections
18
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 19 of 20
BONNIE COLE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
CIVIL ACTION FILE NO.
)
COBB COUNTY SCHOOL ) 1:17-cv-1378-WMR
DISTRICT and CHRIS RAGSDALE, )
Individually and in his capacity as ) JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
Superintendent of COBB COUNTY )
SCHOOL DISTRICT, )
)
Defendants. )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
CM/ECF system which will automatically send email notification of such filing
19
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-2 Filed 02/12/19 Page 20 of 20
20
DocuSign Envelope ID: 21A87C6A-17D4-4ED1-BCF9-3AF5E7B72915
Case 1:17-cv-01378-WMR Document 55-3 Filed 02/12/19 Page 1 of 2
BONNIE COLE, )
)
Plaintiff, ) CIVIL ACTION
) FILE NO. 1:17-cv-01378-WMR
v. )
) JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
COBB COUNTY SCHOOL )
DISTRICT and CHRIS RAGSDALE, )
Individually and in his capacity as )
Superintendent of COBB COUNTY )
SCHOOL DISTRICT, )
)
Defendants. )
perjury under the laws of the United States that the following is true and correct:
1. All statements contained in this Declaration are true and correct to the
that had been used at Bullard, including stretching and breathing techniques.
and found them to be very useful in helping those students manage their emotions.
well as other teachers; John Adams, assistant superintendent; and Dr. Barbara
7. Some of the parents at the meeting raised religious concerns about the
accusatory tone for several minutes. Ms. Daniell accused Bonnie Cole, who was
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
12/21/2018
Executed on _____________________________ (date)
__________________________________________
Katie Greene