PGCS Response To The Complaint

Case 3:18-cv-00649-HEH Document 13 Filed 02/19/19 Page 1 of 15 PageID# 121
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Richmond Division
GLORIA TYLER, ADMINISTRATOR OF

THE ESTATE OF ASHTON GILCHRIST,
DECEASED ,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No. 3:18-cv-00649-HEH
PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY SCHOOL

BOARD AND KRISTINA TRUELL AND
BRENDA LOCKHART-CLARY AND
JOHN/JANE DOES 1-11,
Defendants.
ANSWER OF KRISTINA TRUELL
NOW COMES the Defendant, Kristina Truell (“Truell”), by counsel, and for her Answer
to Plaintiff’s Complaint, hereby denies that she is liable to Plaintiff, denies that Plaintiff’s rights
were violated, denies that Plaintiff is entitled to the amount requested or any amount, denies the
allegations in the first un-numbered paragraph of the Complaint, and further states as follows:
Introduction
1. In response to paragraph 1 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Gloria Tyler,
Administrator of the Estate of Ashton Gilchrist, deceased (“Plaintiff”), has filed this action
arising out of the death of Ashton Gilchrist (“Ashton”) on September 26, 2016. Truell further
admits that, at the time of his death, Ashton was a 16-year-old student attending Prince George
High School (“PGHS”) in Prince George County, Virginia. Truell denies any and all remaining
allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the Complaint.
2. In response to paragraph 2 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Ashton had
multiple disabilities, at the time of his death, lived with his grandmother, Plaintiff, and was non-
1
verbal and required adult support for all of his daily life activities. Truell is without sufficient
information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the
Complaint and, therefore, denies them in the manner and form alleged.
3. In response to paragraph 3 of the Complaint, Truell admits that on September 21,
2016, Ashton was unresponsive at the time of dismissal. The paraprofessional who assisted
Ashton to the bus and the bus driver were concerned about Ashton’s condition and summoned
Truell, the school nurse, and the classroom teacher, Brenda Lockhart-Clary (“Lockhart-Clary”).
After the nurse checked Ashton’s vitals and observed his condition, she recommended that
emergency services be called. Emergency services and Plaintiff were called, and Ashton was
transported by ambulance to John Randolph Medical Center and later VCU Medical Center.
Truell avers that no one refused to call emergency services and that no one told the bus driver
that Ashton had been in this condition all day. Truell denies any and all remaining allegations
contained in paragraph 3 of the Complaint in the manner and form alleged.
4. Truell denies the allegations contained in paragraph 4 of the Complaint.
Parties
5. In response to paragraph 5 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Plaintiff is a
resident of Prince George County and was Ashton’s Grandmother and Guardian. Truell admits
that Ashton was born on July 19, 2000, and resided with Plaintiff at the time of his death. Truell
is without sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in
paragraph 5 of the Complaint.
6. Truell admits the allegations contained in paragraph 6 of the Complaint.
7. In response to paragraph 7 of the Complaint, Truell admits that she was the
Assistant Principal of PGHS from August 2014 to August 2017. The remaining allegations
2
contained in paragraph 7 of the Complaint are legal conclusions to which no response is
required. To the extent that a response is required, Truell denies the remaining allegations
contained in paragraph 7 of the Complaint.
8. In response to paragraph 8 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Lockhart-Clary is
a special education teacher at PGHS. The remaining allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the
Complaint are legal conclusions to which no response is required. To the extent that a response
is required, Truell denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the Complaint.
9. Truell is without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations contained
in paragraph 9 of the Complaint and, therefore denies them.
Jurisdiction and Venue
10. In response to paragraph 10 of the Complaint, Truell admits that the Court has
jurisdiction over this matter, but denies that she violated Ashton’s rights in any way.
11. In response to paragraph 11 of the Complaint, Truell admits that venue is proper
in this Court, but denies that her conduct gives rise to a claim on behalf of Ashton or Plaintiff.
12. In response to paragraph 12 of the Complaint, Truell admits that venue is proper
in this Court, but denies that her conduct gives rise to a claim on behalf of Ashton or Plaintiff.
Facts Common to All Counts
13. In response to paragraph 13 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Ashton was born
on July 19, 2000 and suffered from multiple disabilities. Truell is without sufficient information
to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 13 of the Complaint and,
therefore, denies them in the manner and form alleged.
14. In response to paragraph 14 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Ashton resided
with Plaintiff at the time of his death and that she was his guardian and primary caregiver at that
3
time. Truell is without sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations
contained in paragraph 14 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies them in the manner and form
alleged.
16. Paragraph 16 of the Complaint contains legal conclusions to which no response is
required. To the extent that a response is required, Truell denies the allegations contained in
paragraph 16 of the Complaint in the manner and form alleged.
17. In response to paragraph 17, Truell admits that the School Board identified
Ashton as a student with a disability under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(“IDEA”), and that he was eligible for special education services throughout his education at
PGCPS. Truell denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 17 of the Complaint in
the manner and form alleged.
18. In response to paragraph 18 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Ashton was re-
evaluated in early 2016 to determine his continued eligibility for special education services.
Truell denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 18 in the manner and form
alleged.
various disabilities and required care and assistance for all of his daily life activities. Truell
avers that the May 15, 2016 proposed IEP, which Plaintiff never signed, speaks for itself. Truell
denies any and all remaining allegations contained in paragraph 19 of the Complaint in the
manner and form alleged.
4
limited hand and arm motor skills. Truell avers that the May 15, 2016 proposed IEP, which
Plaintiff never signed, speaks for itself. Truell denies any and all remaining allegations
contained in paragraph 22 of the Complaint in the manner and form alleged.
23. In response to paragraph 23 of the Complaint, Truell admits that during the
2015/2016 school year Ashton was a happy person, aware of his environment, and desired to
interact with it. Truell avers that the May 15, 2016 proposed IEP, which Plaintiff never signed,
speaks for itself. Truell denies any and all remaining allegations contained in paragraph 23 of
the Complaint in the manner and form alleged.
24. In response to paragraph 24 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Ashton was non-
verbal. Truell denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 24 of the Complaint in
the manner and form alleged.
25. In response to paragraph 25 of the Complaint, Truell admits that an Assistive
Technology Assessment was performed and a report dated April 12, 2016 prepared. Truell avers
that the report speaks for itself. Truell denies any and all remaining allegations contained in
26. In response to paragraph 26 of the Complaint, Truell avers that the Assistive
Technology Assessment report dated April 12, 2016 speaks for itself. Truell denies any and all
remaining allegations contained in paragraph 26 of the Complaint.
27. Truell denies the allegations contained in paragraph 27 of the Complaint in the
28. In response to paragraph 28 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Ashton required
monitoring and attention during the day, was required to be fed a pureed diet and small amounts
5
of liquids at a time, was transported to school on a wheelchair-accessible bus accompanied by an
aide, and that a seizure plan was in place. Truell denies the remaining allegations contained in
29. Truell admits the allegations contained in paragraph 29 of the Complaint in the
in paragraph 30 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies them in the manner and form alleged.
31. In response to paragraph 31 of the Complaint, Truell admits that she was the
Assistant Principal at PGHS and that she was familiar with Ashton’s disabilities and his
dependence upon adult support. Truell denies any and all remaining allegations contained in
paragraph 31 in the manner and form alleged.
33. In response to paragraph 33 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Lockhart-Clary
was Ashton’s classroom teacher on September 21, 2016, and that three paraprofessionals worked
in Ashton’s classroom on that day. Truell is without sufficient information to admit or deny the
remaining allegations contained in paragraph 33 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies them.
34. Truell denies the allegations contained in paragraph 34 in the manner and form
alleged.
35. In response to paragraph 35 of the Complaint, Truell admits that at the end of the
school day a paraprofessional brought Ashton in his wheelchair to the school bus waiting outside
to transport him home. Truell further admits that, at that time, the school bus driver (“Allen”)
and the paraprofessional noticed that Ashton was unresponsive. Truell denies any and all
6
remaining allegations contained in paragraph 35 of the Complaint in the manner and form
alleged.
in paragraph 36 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies them in the manner and form alleged.
39. In response to paragraph 39 of the Complaint, Truell admits that an employee
returned to the building to call for the school nurse. Truell denies any and all remaining
allegations contained in paragraph 39 in the manner and form alleged.
40. In response to paragraph 40 of the Complaint, Truell admits that the school nurse
responded to the bus loop and determined that it was necessary to call for an ambulance. Truell
avers that she agreed with this decision. Truell denies any and all remaining allegations
contained in paragraph 40 of the Complaint.
41. In response to paragraph 41 of the Complaint, Truell avers that Plaintiff was
contacted regarding Ashton’s condition at approximately 2:30 p.m. after school personnel called
emergency services. Truell denies any and all remaining allegations contained in paragraph 41
of the Complaint.
44. In response to paragraph 44 of the Complaint, Truell admits that JRMC provided
emergency services to Ashton and determined that he needed to be airlifted to VCU Medical
Center. Truell is without sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations
contained in paragraph 44 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies them.
7
45. In response to paragraph 45 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Ashton was
transported by air to the VCU Medical Center on September 21, 2016. Truell is without
sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 45 of
the Complaint and, therefore, denies them.
46. Upon information and belief, Truell admits the allegations contained in paragraph
46 of the Complaint.
Count One: Wrongful Death – Negligence, Gross Negligence,

and Willful and Wanton Negligence
(Against all Defendants)
48. In response to paragraph 48 of the Complaint, Truell incorporates by reference
paragraphs 1-47 of this Answer as if set forth fully herein.
required. To the extent a response is required, Truell denies the allegations contained in
required. To the extent a response is required, Truell denies the allegations contained in
8
Count Two: Deprivation of Civil Rights – 42 U.S.C. § 1983

paragraph 1-66 of this Answer as if set forth fully herein.
9
Count Three: Deprivation of Civil Rights – 42 U.S.C. § 1983

(All Defendants)
80. In response to paragraph to paragraph 80 of the Complaint, Truell incorporates by
reference paragraphs 1-79 of this Answer as if set forth fully herein.
81. In response to paragraph 81 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Ashton was
dependent upon PGCPS employees for his needs during the school day. Truell denies any and
all remaining allegations contained in paragraph 81 of the Complaint.
10
Count Four: Deprivation of Civil Rights – 42 U.S.C. § 1983

11
Count Five: Deprivation of Civil Rights – 42 U.S.C. § 1983

100. Paragraph 100 of the Complaint contains legal conclusions to which no response
is required. To the extent a response is required, Truell denies the allegations contained in
is required. To the extent that a response is required, Truell denies the allegations contained in
12
Count Six: Deprivation of Civil Rights – 42 U.S.C. § 1983

paragraphs 1-115 of this Answer as if set forth fully herein.
is required. To the extent that a response is required, Truell denies the allegation contained in
is required. To the extent that a response is required, Truell denies the allegations contained in
SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
127. Truell avers that Plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action upon which relief
can be granted for the reasons stated in the Motion to Dismiss, which is hereby incorporated as if
set forth fully herein.
128. Truell denies each and every allegation in the Complaint not specifically admitted
herein.
13
129. Truell avers that, where applicable, she is entitled to sovereign immunity.
130. Truell avers that she is entitled to qualified immunity.
131. Truell avers that she intends to rely upon the defense of state good faith immunity
as a bar to Plaintiff’s claims.
132. Truell specifically denies that any of her conduct violated any of Ashton’s
constitutional rights.
133. Truell specifically denies that Ashton’s constitutional rights were violated.
134. Truell denies that she acted with bad faith or gross misjudgment.
135. Truell avers that none of her alleged conduct was a proximate cause, the sole
reason or cause for, the reason for, or a motivating factor of Ashton’s alleged injuries and
damages.
136. Truell avers that all actions taken on her part were done in good faith and for
legitimate reasons and with reasonable grounds for believing she had not violated the
constitution or any other federal law.
137. Truell denies that she is indebted to Plaintiff in the amount claimed or in any
amount, for the reasons stated or for any reason.
138. Truell will rely upon any and all other defenses lawfully available to her
developed through discovery, or otherwise, at the time of trial and reserves the right to amend
her Answer if necessary.
WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, Kristina Truell, by counsel, respectfully
requests judgment in her favor together with her costs and attorney fees expended herein.
TRIAL BY JURY IS DEMANDED
14
KRISTINA TRUELL
By Counsel
/s/
David P. Corrigan (VSB No. 26341)
Melissa Y. York (VSB No. 77493)
Attorney(s) for Prince George County School Board, Kristina Truell, and Brenda Lockhart-Clary
Harman, Claytor, Corrigan & Wellman
P.O. Box 70280
Richmond, Virginia 23255
804-747-5200 - Phone
804-747-6085 - Fax
dcorrigan@hccw.com
myork@hccw.com
CERTIFICATE
I hereby certify that on the 19th day of February, 2019, I electronically filed the
foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of
such filing to the following:
Harold G. Belkowitz, VSB No. 37274

Belkowitz Law, PLLC
10427 North Street, Suite 200
Fairfax, VA 22030
703-246-9270 - Phone
703-246-9271 - Fax
HBelkowitz@belkowitzlaw.com
/s/
David P. Corrigan (VSB No. 26341)
Melissa Y. York (VSB No. 77493)
Attorney(s) for Prince George County School
Board, Kristina Truell, and Brenda Lockhart-Clary
Harman, Claytor, Corrigan & Wellman
P.O. Box 70280
Richmond, Virginia 23255
804-747-5200 - Phone
804-747-6085 - Fax
dcorrigan@hccw.com
myork@hccw.com
15

PGCS Response To The Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

PGCS Response To The Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PGCS Response To The Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 3:18-cv-00649-HEH Document 13 Filed 02/19/19 Page 1 of 15 PageID# 121

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

GLORIA TYLER, ADMINISTRATOR OF

v. Case No. 3:18-cv-00649-HEH

PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY SCHOOL

ANSWER OF KRISTINA TRUELL

1. In response to paragraph 1 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Gloria Tyler,

allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the Complaint.

2. In response to paragraph 2 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Ashton had

information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the

3. In response to paragraph 3 of the Complaint, Truell admits that on September 21,

contained in paragraph 3 of the Complaint in the manner and form alleged.

4. Truell denies the allegations contained in paragraph 4 of the Complaint.

5. In response to paragraph 5 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Plaintiff is a

is without sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in

paragraph 5 of the Complaint.

6. Truell admits the allegations contained in paragraph 6 of the Complaint.

contained in paragraph 7 of the Complaint are legal conclusions to which no response is

contained in paragraph 7 of the Complaint.

8. In response to paragraph 8 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Lockhart-Clary is

9. Truell is without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations contained

in paragraph 9 of the Complaint and, therefore denies them.

Jurisdiction and Venue

Facts Common to All Counts

therefore, denies them in the manner and form alleged.

15. Truell admits the allegations contained in paragraph 15 of the Complaint.

16. Paragraph 16 of the Complaint contains legal conclusions to which no response is

paragraph 16 of the Complaint in the manner and form alleged.

the manner and form alleged.

manner and form alleged.

20. Truell admits the allegations contained in paragraph 20 of the Complaint.

21. Truell admits the allegations contained in paragraph 21 of the Complaint.

contained in paragraph 22 of the Complaint in the manner and form alleged.

the Complaint in the manner and form alleged.

the manner and form alleged.

25. In response to paragraph 25 of the Complaint, Truell admits that an Assistive

paragraph 25 of the Complaint in the manner and form alleged.

remaining allegations contained in paragraph 26 of the Complaint.

manner and form alleged.

of liquids at a time, was transported to school on a wheelchair-accessible bus accompanied by an

paragraph 28 of the Complaint in the manner and form alleged.

manner and form alleged.

paragraph 31 in the manner and form alleged.

32. Truell admits the allegations contained in paragraph 32 of the Complaint.

33. In response to paragraph 33 of the Complaint, Truell admits that Lockhart-Clary

37. Truell denies the allegations contained in paragraph 37 of the Complaint.

38. Truell denies the allegations contained in paragraph 38 of the Complaint.

39. In response to paragraph 39 of the Complaint, Truell admits that an employee

allegations contained in paragraph 39 in the manner and form alleged.

contained in paragraph 40 of the Complaint.

42. Truell admits the allegations contained in paragraph 42 of the Complaint.

43. Truell denies the allegations contained in paragraph 43 of the Complaint.

contained in paragraph 44 of the Complaint and, therefore, denies them.

sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 45 of

the Complaint and, therefore, denies them.

47. Truell denies the allegations contained in paragraph 47 of the Complaint.

Count One: Wrongful Death – Negligence, Gross Negligence,

48. In response to paragraph 48 of the Complaint, Truell incorporates by reference