LG v Williamsburg County School District - Complaint

ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2018 May 31 9:42 PM - WILLIAMSBURG - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2018CP4500244
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

) FOR THE THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
COUNTY OF WILLIAMSBURG ) CASE No.: 2018-CP-45-
)
L.G., individually and as the parent and )
natural guardian of JANE DOE, a minor, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) SUMMONS
)
vs. )
)
WILLIAMSBURG COUNTY SCHOOL )
DISTRICT, )
)
Defendant. )
____________________________________)
TO THE DEFENDANT ABOVE NAMED:
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED AND REQUIRED to answer the Complaint in this
action, of which a copy is herewith served upon you, and to serve a copy of your Answer to said
Complaint on the below subscribed attorney at 207 East Third North Street, Summerville, SC
29483 within thirty (30) days after the service hereof exclusive of the day of such service; and if
you fail to answer the Complaint within the time aforesaid, the Plaintiff in this action will apply
to the Court for the relief demanded in this action and judgment by default will be rendered
against you in the relief demanded in the Complaint.
Respectfully submitted,
KNIGHT & WHITTINGTON, LLC
S/Matthew T. Douglas____________
Matthew T. Douglas
207 East Third North St.
PO Box 280
Summerville, SC 29484
1
(P) 843-821-9700
(F) 843-821-0031
mdouglas@knightwhittington.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
Summerville, South Carolina
May 31, 2018
2
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) FOR THE THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
COUNTY OF WILLIAMSBURG ) CASE No.: 2018-CP-45-
)
L.G., individually and as the parent and )
natural guardian of JANE DOE, a minor, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) COMPLAINT
) (Jury Trial Demanded)
vs. )
)
WILLIAMSBURG COUNTY SCHOOL )
DISTRICT, )
)
Defendant. )
____________________________________)
Plaintiff L.G., individually and as the parent and natural guardian of Jane Doe, a minor,
by and through undersigned counsel, complains of the above-named Defendant and comes now
to allege and show unto the Court the following:
PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE
1. Plaintiffs are citizens and residents of Williamsburg County, South Carolina.
Because the minor Plaintiff Jane Doe is under the age of eighteen (18) and a victim of sexual
conduct, she is referred to in this public filing by pseudonym to maintain the confidentiality of
her identity. Jane Doe is represented in this action by her mother and natural guardian, L.G. In
order to protect the identity of the minor, it is necessary to also identify her mother by pseudonym.
Defendant has been informed of the identity of the minor and her mother by separate
communication to maintain the confidentiality of that information.
2. Defendant Williamsburg County School District (“WCSD” or “Defendant”) is a
school district, as defined in S.C. Code Ann. § 59-17-10, and a political subdivision, as defined
3
in S.C. Code Ann. § 15-78-30(h), having agents, employees, offices, or properties located in
Williamsburg County, South Carolina. At all times relevant to this Complaint, WCSD was acting
by and through its agents, servants, employees and/or officers.
3. Kingstree Middle Magnet School (“KMMS”) is an entity operated by Defendant
which is an agency, subsidiary, political subdivision and/or governmental entity of the State of
South Carolina.
4. At all times complained of herein, the administrators, faculty, staff, agents,
servants, and/or employees of KMMS and/or WCSD were acting within the course and scope of
their employment with, and as an agent, representative, servant, and/or employee of the
Defendant.
5. This Court has jurisdiction of the parties and subject matter hereof.
6. Venue is proper in this Court because the most substantial acts and/or omissions
giving rise to the causes of action alleged herein occurred in Williamsburg County, South
Carolina.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
7. On February 26, 2016, the minor Plaintiff Jane Doe was a student at KMMS
attending classes and located on the school premises. On said date, during school hours, Jane
Doe used the girls’ bathroom with permission. While Jane Doe was located in the girls’ restroom,
a male student attending KMMS entered the girls’ restroom and proceeded to rape and sexually
assault the minor Plaintiff Jane Doe against her will and in violation of her express, repeated
instructions to the attacker to stop. For the purposes of this complaint, the attacker, a minor, shall
be referred to as SA (student attacker). The identity of the student attacker has been provided to
the Defendant in a separate communication.
4
8. At some point during the assault, SA put on, or attempted to put on, a condom and
discarded the same in the girls’ bathroom after the attack was over.
9. SA ran out of the girls’ bathroom after the attack on Jane Doe because an adult
female teacher, staff, representative, servant, and/or agent of the Defendant entered the girls’
restroom and shouted SA’s name.
10. Immediately after the referenced sexual assault/rape, Jane Doe told the adult
female who entered the restroom that she had been sexually assaulted and raped against her will
by SA. Shortly thereafter, Jane Doe also told school resource officer Moore that she had been
sexually assaulted/raped against her will by SA.
11. At all times pertinent to this action, school resource officer Moore was an agent,
employee, servant, officer, and/or representative of Defendant.
12. After Jane Doe told the adult female staff member who entered the restroom and
school resource officer Moore that she had been sexually assaulted/raped against her will by SA,
Assistant Principal of KMMS, Mack Burgess, took Jane Doe to the KMMS principal’s office.
Once there, Jane Doe was placed in the same room and/or in close proximity to SA.
13. After the assault on Jane Doe, SA falsely told faculty and administrators of
KMMS that he was in the girls’ restroom “to get his money back” from Jane Doe and that no
sexual contact occurred between him and Jane Doe.
14. Defendant, by and through the acts and omission of its staff, faculty, officers,
employees, servants, and/or agents, left SA completely unsupervised for more than twenty (20)
minutes before the adult female KMMS staff member/agent entered the girls’ restroom and
called out SA’s name.
5
15. Shortly after the attack on Jane Doe, school resource officer Moore and/or other
KMMS staff informed Assistant Principal Mack Burgess that a condom and/or condom
wrapper was present in the in the girls’ restroom where the attack occurred. At that time,
school resource officer Moore and/or other KMMS staff asked Mack Burgess if they should
retrieve and preserve the condom. In response, Mack Burgess told them to dispose of the
condom.
16. Upon information and belief, on the same day and shortly after the attack, and
before a proper investigation had taken place, Mack Burgess informed Jane Doe that she was
expelled for having sex in the restroom and gave Jane Doe an expulsion note. Mack Burgess then
called Jane Doe’s father and informed him that he needed to come to the school and pick up Jane
Doe for undisclosed reasons. When he arrived at the school, Mack Burgess informed him that
Jane Doe was being expelled for having sex in the restroom. At that time, Mack Burgess also told
Jane Doe’s father that Jane Doe had a reputation for being promiscuous.
17. That Plaintiff Jane Doe was not promiscuous and Mack Burgess had absolutely
no basis for telling Jane Doe’s parent that she was promiscuous.
18. At all times relevant herein, the Defendant failed to report student on student sexual
misconduct and harassment allegations in violation of S.C. Code Ann. § 59-24-60 and § 63-7-310,
including but not limited to failing to report the alleged sexual assault and rape on Jane Doe.
19. After Jane Doe left school on the day of the attack, her parents took her to the
hospital and reported the sexual assault/rape to the police department.
20. On February 28, 2016, Officer Dixon of the Kingstree Police Department
contacted the Principal of KMMS, Mrs. Hester Gadsden, regarding Jane Doe’s sexual assault.
At that time, Mrs. Gadsden told Officer Dixon that she was not aware that there had been an
6
alleged sexual assault or rape. Mrs. Gadsden then stated that Mack Burgess told her that he had
expelled two students that week for being in the restroom together but that Mack Burgess had
told her that there “was no need for the school to be concerned.”
21. On or about February 28, 2016, Mack Burgess called Jane Doe’s father and told
him that Jane Doe was not going to be expelled.
22. Despite not conducting its own proper investigation, the Defendant, through its
staff, administrators, and/or agents, did not cooperate with law enforcement investigation efforts
into Jane Doe’s sexual assault, including but not limited to: (i) refusing to turn over surveillance
video to investigating officers; (ii) refusing to permit investigating officers to view the
surveillance video; (iii) failing to respond to requests for information; (iv) escorting/ushering
investigating officers off the school premises before they had completed their investigation; (v)
destroying evidence related to the sexual assault of Jane Doe, including but not limited to
disposing of the condom/wrapper; and (vi) in knowingly making unsupported and inaccurate
statements to law enforcement.
23. On March 4, 2016, after the Defendant had impeded law enforcement’s
investigation as referenced above, the Defendant provided the Kingstree Police Department with
a letter stating that the Defendant was turning over the investigation of the alleged sexual assault
of Jane Doe to the Kingstree Police Department.
24. Upon information and belief, the Defendant, by and through the acts and omissions
of its administrators, faculty, employees and agents knew or should have known that SA had
sexually assaulted, harassed, and/or discriminated against other minor female students attending
KMMS on the school premises prior to the assault on Jane Doe.
25. Upon information and belief, the Defendant knew or should have known that SA
7
was dangerous to female students and that it was reasonably foreseeable, and likely, that SA would
assault female students at KMMS causing them personal injury.
26. On or about January 7, 2016, before the attack on Jane Doe, another minor female
student at KMMS (“Victim 1”) was sexually assaulted by SA on school grounds during school
hours. In the sexual assault on Victim 1, SA and two (2) other male students attending KMMS
grabbed Victim 1 in the hallway and pulled her, against her will, into the locker room and then into
the restroom inside the locker room. At that point SA and the two other boys proceeded to sexually
assault Victim 1.
27. Immediately after the assault, Victim 1 reported to faculty, teachers, staff,
employees, agents and/or administrators of the Defendant that SA and the other two students had
sexually assaulted her in the restroom located in the locker room at KMMS against her will.
28. After Victim 1 reported the sexual assault to the Defendant, it placed Victim 1 in the
same room with SA and the other two male students. At that time, one of the three male students
admitted to the school resource officer that the boys pulled Victim 1 into the locker room against
her will.
29. Mack Burgess was informed of the referenced admission of one of the attackers and
of Victim 1’s allegations of sexual assault. In response thereto, no further investigation was
conducted by the Defendant and Mack Burgess told Victim 1 that she was being suspended or
expelled for engaging in sexual misconduct on school grounds despite her unqualified allegation
that SA and two other boys sexually assaulted her against her will. At that point, the Defendant
placed Victim 1 on the school bus to ride home.
30. After the sexual assault of Victim 1, Defendant did not report Victim 1’s alleged
sexual assault to law enforcement or any other agency.
8
31. Victim 1 reported her sexual assault to Kingstree Police Department when she
arrived home from school on the evening of the sexual assault. Thereafter, on or about January
8, 2016, the Kingstree Police Department began an investigation and sent investigating officers
to KMMS to discuss Victim 1’s sexual assault allegations with KMMS administrators and
faculty, including but not limited to meeting with Vice Principal Mack Burgess and Principal
Hester Gadsden.
32. During the referenced meeting between officers and the Defendant, Mack Burgess
told the Kingstree Police Department officers and investigators that Victim 1 told him that she
was pulled into the locker room against her will. Shortly thereafter, Principal Gadsden entered
the room where the meeting was being conducted and Mack Burgess proceeded to change his
story and told the Kingstree Police Department that he was never aware of any attempted possible
rape of Victim 1. At that point, officers/investigators asked Principal Gadsden and Mack Burgess
what was the school’s policy regarding notification of law enforcement. In response, Principal
Gadsden and Vice Principal Burgess could not, or would not, provide an answer. After several
more related questions regarding the school’s policies and procedures, Mack Burgess pulled out
the school handbook and proceeded to read a section regarding notification of law enforcement
for sexual misconduct.
33. Once the referenced meeting between Kingstree Police Department and the
Defendant took place, investigators/officers went to interview the KMMS teacher who
discovered the three student attackers and Victim 1 in the locker room. During that interview,
Principal Gadsden interrupted and attempted to escort the officers/investigators off the school
premises.
9
34. After the Kingstree Police Department officers and investigators left KMMS they
traveled to the office of WCSD Superintendent, Carrie Brock. When Kingstree Police
Department asked Ms. Brock what she knew about Victim 1’s allegations, Ms. Brock stated that
“she had heard some of what was going on at the school” but asked the officer to “fill her in.”
Later, in the same meeting, Ms. Brock advised the officers/investigators that, in her opinion, law
enforcement should have been called. At the close of the meeting, Ms. Brock asked that the
Kingstree Police Department notify her as to the findings of their investigation.
35. During the course of law enforcement’s investigation into Victim 1’s sexual
assault allegations, the Defendant, by and through its agents, teachers, administrators, staff,
servants, and/or agents impeded the Kingstree Police Department’s investigation by: refusing to
notify law enforcement of Jane Doe’s allegations; refusing to provide requested information;
providing knowingly false statements to officers/investigators; and in such other ways as alleged
herein and as may be shown at the trial of this case.
36. Prior to the sexual assault on Victim 1 and Jane Doe, other minor students at
KMMS reported to teachers, faculty, staff, and administrators of the Defendant that SA had
engaged in sexual misconduct and unwanted sexual acts/assaults on other minor female students
of KMMS.
37. Prior to the sexual assault on Victim 1 and Jane Doe, SA was suspended for one
(1) day for allegedly sexually penetrating a minor female KMMS student with his finger(s). Said
discipline was in violation of the school’s policy which required a minimum of 10 days
suspension for a first offense of sexual misconduct and an expulsion hearing after a second
offense.
10
38. Prior to the sexual assault on Jane Doe, it was well-known amongst KMMS
employees, staff, teachers, and administrators that SA was very likely to continue to sexually
assault minor female KMMS students on school grounds during school hours if SA was ever left
unsupervised for any period of time at the school.
39. WCSD attempted to conceal allegations of student on student sexual misconduct
at KMMS before and after the incident involving the minor Plaintiff Jane Doe in complete
disregard for the safety and rights of KMMS students in the following particulars: a) destroying
evidence; b) refusal to report sexual misconduct involving minors to law enforcement and other
appropriate third parties; c) refusal to conduct an investigation into sexual assault allegations
involving minors and allegations of sexual misconduct involving students generally; d) failing to
provide training to KMMS faculty, staff and employees regarding responding to and
investigating allegations of sexual misconduct involving minors; e) not following discipline
procedures following acts of sexual misconduct by minor students at KMMS; and f) in such other
ways as alleged herein and as the evidence at trial may show.
40. Prior to the sexual assault of Plaintiff Jane Doe, Defendant WCSD had actual or
constructive knowledge that SA posed a serious and imminent threat to the safety and well-being
of minor female students at KMMS both before and after the sexual assault on Plaintiff Jane Doe
and Victim 1.
41. Prior to the sexual assault of Jane Doe, during the 2015-2016 school year, there
were other instances at KMMS of student on student sexual misconduct, harassment, and
discrimination that were known to the Defendant but not properly investigated or reported.
42. Prior to the sexual assault of Jane Doe, during the 2015-2016 school year, there
were other incidents at WCSD schools in Williamsburg County that involved student on student
11
criminal conduct, including assaults resulting in personal injury and theft of personal property, that
the Defendant did not properly investigate or report to law enforcement. Additionally, when the
parents of students contacted law enforcement to report student on student assaults and theft after
the school had not reported the same, the Defendant refused to cooperate with law enforcement’s
investigation despite the Defendant not performing anything close to an appropriate investigation.
43. WCSD did not follow its own disciplinary procedure before and/or after the above
referenced sexual assault/rape in regards to SA or his victims before or after the attack on Jane
Doe.
44. WCSD did not follow its own disciplinary procedure after the assault/rape in
regards to Plaintiff Jane Doe.
45. WCSD did not follow its own investigative procedure regarding sexual
misconduct allegations involving minor students before and/or after the sexual assaults on Jane
Doe and Victim 1.
46. As a result of the sexual assault by SA, and the acts and/or omissions of the
Defendant prior to the assault of Jane Doe at KMMS, Plaintiff Jane Doe has suffered damages
including but not limited to physical injury, psychological injury and counseling, medical
treatment, pain and suffering, emotional distress, inability to attend school away from home,
inability to trust adults in positions of authority, difficulty in maintaining intimate relationships,
inability to receive an education free from sexual misconduct, harassment and discrimination, and
for any future physical manifestations of distress and injury as the minor Plaintiff matures, which
appears likely at this time.
47. As a result of the actions of Defendant after the sexual assault/rape on Jane Doe,
the minor Plaintiff Jane Doe has suffered damages including but not limited to severe emotional
12
distress, injury, severe anxiety, psychological injury and counseling, pain and suffering, emotional
distress, loss of enjoyment of life, inability to attend school away from home, inability to trust
adults in positions of authority, inability to receive an education free from sexual misconduct,
harassment and discrimination, and for any future physical manifestations of distress and injury
as the minor Plaintiff matures, which appears likely at this time.
48. As a result of the sexual assault/rape by SA of Jane Doe, and the acts and/or
omissions of the Defendant, both before and after the sexual assault/rape on Jane Doe, Plaintiff
L.G., individually, has incurred in the past and, upon information and belief, in the future will
incur: medical expenses for treatment received by her daughter; travel expenses; consequential
damages; and loss of services of her daughter.
CAUSE OF ACTION
Gross Negligence – Tort Claims Act
49. All allegations of the preceding paragraphs are hereby incorporated and alleged
as if fully set forth herein verbatim.
50. At all times as set forth herein, WCSD owed the Plaintiffs a duty: to supervise,
protect and exercise control over its students with the appropriate level of care and not in a grossly
negligent manner; to refrain from exhibiting a conscious disregard for the safety and well-being
of its students; to supervise, protect, and control student’s activity on the premises at Kingstree
Middle Magnet School so as to provide the minor Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals
with a safe, educational, and harassment-free environment to receive a public education; and all
other duties and responsibilities set forth by the law of the State of South Carolina, industry
standards, and Defendant’s own policies and procedures.
51. At all times as set forth herein, WCSD owed the Plaintiff and similarly situated
individuals, a duty to supervise, protect, and control the activity of students by following
13
disciplinary, investigative and reporting procedures mandated by South Carolina law and WCSD
policies/guidelines.
52. WCSD, by and through its administrators, employees, agents and faculty knew or
should have known, before the assault on Jane Doe, that it was reasonably foreseeable and likely
that SA would sexually assault KMMS female students on school grounds during school hours
but nonetheless exercised control, custody and supervision of KMMS students in violation of
S.C. Code Ann. § 15-78-60 (25).
53. Based on the knowledge, actual or constructive, of WCSD, Defendant, SA should
not have been enrolled at KMMS at the time of the assault on Jane Doe or, at the least, the school
should have ensured: that SA was not permitted to roam the hallways; that SA was accounted for
at all times; that SA would never be left unsupervised; that SA never be left alone with female
students; that SA would be kept out of the girls’ bathroom; and that the appropriate level of care
would be exercised to make sure SA would not sexually assault female students on school
grounds during school hours.
54. The incidents described above and the Plaintiffs resulting damages and injuries
were directly and proximately caused by the grossly negligent, reckless, willful, and/or wanton
acts of Defendant WCSD, by and through its agents, servants, and/or employees in, at least, one,
more, or all of the following particulars:
a. Failure to apply corrective measures when staff, employees, agents,

and/or servants do not properly implement said policies and procedures
regarding supervision, protection, control of students and recognizing
and preventing student on student sexual misconduct and those likely to
engage in sexual misconduct;
b. Failure to terminate the employment of staff, employees, agents, and/or

servants who routinely ignore corrective measures applied to implement
said policies and procedures regarding supervision, protection, control of
14
students and recognizing and preventing student on student sexual
misconduct and those likely to engage in sexual misconduct;
c. Failure to hire and train staff, employees, agents, and/or servants to

properly supervise, protect, control students, and recognize and prevent
student on student sexual misconduct and those likely to engage in
sexual misconduct;
d. Failure to follow policies and procedures regarding supervision,

protection, control of students and recognition and prevention of student
on student sexual misconduct and those likely to engage in sexual
misconduct;
e. Failure to train and monitor staff, employees, agents, and/or servants to

follow policies and procedures regarding supervision, protection, control
of students and recognition and prevention of student on student sexual
f. Failure to train staff, employees, agents, and/or servants in proper and

acceptable supervision methods when students, like Jane Doe, have been
the victim of a sexual assault at the hands of another student;
g. Failing to have proper policies and procedures regarding supervision,

protection, control of students, and recognizing and preventing student
on student sexual misconduct and those likely to engage in sexual
misconduct;
h. Even if such policies and procedures exist, failure to properly implement

said policies and procedures regarding supervision, protection, control of
students and recognizing and preventing student on student sexual
i. Failure to supervise staff, employees, agents, and/or servants in applying

supervision methods when students, like Jane Doe, have been the victim
of a sexual assault at the hands of another student;
j. Failure to recognize and prevent the escalation of sexual discrimination

and misconduct against students by other students, including but not
limited to Jane Doe;
k. Failure to train staff, employees, agents, and/or servants in recognizing and

preventing the escalation of student on student sexual misconduct;
l. Failure to prevent student on student sexual discrimination and misconduct

to escalate into causing physical harm;
15
m. Failure to train staff, employees, agents, and/or servants in proper procedures
to notify law enforcement and/or other proper authorities and/or third parties
when a student alleges she has been the victim of sexual misconduct at the
hands of another student on school grounds and during school hours;
n. Failure to implement adequate supervision, security or safety measures

designed to prevent or substantially reduce the likelihood of student on
student sexual misconduct and discrimination, including but not limited to
sexual misconduct and discrimination that results in personal injury like that
experienced by Jane Doe;
o. Conscious failure to train and monitor its staff, employees, agents, and/or
servants with regard to supervision;
p. Conscious failure to train and monitor its staff, employees, agents, and/or
servants with regard to student on student sexual misconduct and
discrimination;
q. Conscious failure to prevent instances of student on student sexual

misconduct and discrimination;
r. Conscious failure to report allegations or instances of student on student

sexual misconduct and discrimination to the proper authorities, including law
enforcement;
s. Conscious failure to train and supervise its staff, employees, agents, and/or
servants with regard to investigations into allegations of student on student
sexual misconduct and discrimination;
t. Conscious failure to follow disciplinary policies and procedures that relate to

student on student sexual misconduct
u. Failing to provide necessary protection to Jane Doe while in the care, custody,
and control of the Defendant;
v. Failure to properly observe, implement, and follow disciplinary policies and

procedures relating to instances of student on student sexual assault and
discrimination;
w. By failing to observe, adhere to, or follow state and federal laws governing
the reporting of and response to sexual harassment, sexual discrimination,
and sexual abuse, namely S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-310 and Title IX, 20
U.S.C.A. §1681(a);
x. By failing to properly supervise SA while he was a student and while on

the Kingstree Middle Magnet School premises despite knowledge and
16
information of the threat SA posed to the minor Plaintiff and other minor
female students;
y. By enabling and allowing SA to use the Kingstree Middle Magnet School

property and facilities for engaging in sexually inappropriate conduct and
behavior with the minor Plaintiff and other female students;
z. By intentionally failing to conduct a proper investigation so that the

multiple instances of sexual assault by SA and other students on school
grounds, before and including the assault of the minor Plaintiff, would not
become known publicly or subject the Defendant to liability;
aa. SA’s sexual battery of the minor Plaintiff was a foreseeable and
predictable result of WCSD administration and staff failure to exercise
slight care in performing school duties to provide the minor Plaintiff with
a safe environment free from sexual assault, injury, discrimination and
harassment to receive an education;
bb. By failing to act to protect the minor Plaintiff after observing SA engaging
in a pattern and practice of sexual misconduct and inappropriate behavior
toward other female students on school grounds;
cc. By facilitating and fostering an environment which enabled SA to prey on

the vulnerabilities of adolescent females, including the minor Plaintiff, at
Kingstree Middle Magnet School;
dd. By failing to provide any supervision of SA in the 30 minutes leading up

to the sexual assault of Jane Doe; and
ee. In such other and further ways as may be shown at the trial of this matter.
55. The above acts of negligence, gross negligence, recklessness, willfulness,
wantonness, and gross breaches of the proper standard of care by and through its employees,
agents, and/or servants of Defendant have caused the minor Plaintiff Jane Doe to suffer physical
injury, pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, humiliation, indignity,
undue grief, and e medical treatment, all of which are likely to continue in the future as a result
of the Defendant’s grossly negligent acts. As such, Jane Doe is entitled to actual, punitive, and
consequential damages from the Defendant.
17
56. As a result of the actions of Defendant after the sexual assault/rape on Jane Doe,
the minor Plaintiff Jane Doe has suffered damages including but not limited to severe emotional
distress, injury, psychological injury and counseling, pain and suffering, anxiety, loss of
enjoyment of life, inability to attend school away from home, inability to trust adults in positions
of authority, inability to receive an education free from sexual misconduct, harassment and
discrimination, and for any future physical manifestations of distress and injury as the minor
Plaintiff matures.
57. As a result of the sexual assault/rape by SA of Jane Doe, and the actions of WCSD
faculty and administrators before and after the sexual assault/rape on Jane Doe, Plaintiff L.G.,
individually, has incurred in the past and, upon information and belief, in the future will incur:
medical expenses for treatment received by her daughter Jane Doe; travel expenses;
consequential damages; and loss of services of her daughter.
CAUSE OF ACTION
Outrage
58. The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are hereby incorporated and
alleged as if fully set forth herein.
59. Defendant intentionally or recklessly inflicted severe emotional distress upon
Jane Doe, or knew that such distress would probably result from its conduct, based on the acts
and omissions of WCSD employees, faculty, agents, servants, and administrators in one or more
of the following particulars:
a. By failing to control, restrict, limit, or in any way affect SA

interaction with the minor Plaintiff on school grounds;
b. By informing Jane Doe that she was expelled shortly after being the
victim of a sexual assault/rape;
18
c. By lying to the minor Plaintiff’s parents by stating that the minor Plaintiff
was promiscuous;
d. By intentionally disposing of evidence related to the sexual assault;
e. By refusing to investigate Jane Doe’s sexual assault/rape allegations;
f. By refusing to report the sexual assault to appropriate authorities including

law enforcement, both before and after the assault on Jane Doe;
g. By intentionally impeding, misleading, and impairing law

enforcement’s investigation into Jane Doe’s allegations;
h. By creating an environment that fostered and facilitated student on

student sexual misconduct, harassment and discrimination, both
before and after the assault on Jane Doe;
i. In handling investigations following allegations of sexual misconduct

with the primary goal of limiting any potential liability of the
Defendant;
j. In conducting investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct,

harassment, and discrimination in a manner to designed to effectuate
the primary purpose of limiting potential liability to the Defendant;
k. In disciplining students following allegations of sexual misconduct,

harassment, and discrimination in a manner designed to accomplish
the primary goal of limiting potential liability to the Defendant;
l. In arbitrarily expelling Jane Doe on the day of the sexual assault

based on the information known to the Defendant at that time in
connection with the scope of the “investigation” conducted by the
Defendant to that point in time;
m. In those ways as alleged in all preceding paragraphs of this

Complaint; and
n. In such other particulars as may be revealed in discovery or shown at trial.
All of which were a direct and proximate cause of the damages and injuries incurred by
the Plaintiffs.
19
60. Defendant’s conduct as alleged above was so extreme and outrageous that it
exceeded all possible bounds of decency and was furthermore atrocious, and utterly
intolerable in a civilized community.
61. The action and inaction of WCSD following the sexual assault on the minor
Plaintiff caused Jane Doe to suffer emotional distress so severe that no reasonable person
could be expected to endure it.
62. As a result of the egregious and outrageous conduct of WCSD, Jane Doe is
entitled to actual and compensatory damages including but not limited to special damages for
medical treatment, physical injury, loss of enjoyment of life, emotional distress, pain and
suffering, the minor Plaintiff's inability to trust adults in positions of authority, difficulty in
maintaining intimate relationships, inability to receive an education free from sexual
misconduct, harassment and discrimination, and for any future physical manifestations of
distress and injury as the minor Plaintiff matures, which appears likely at this time.
CAUSE OF ACTION
Defamation - Slander
63. The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are hereby incorporated and
alleged as if fully set forth herein.
64. That at all times pertinent to hereto, Mack Burgess was acting in his official
capacity as Vice Principal of KMMS and within the course of his employment with WCSD.
65. That after the sexual assault of Jane Doe, Mack Burgess told third parties,
including but not limited to the father of the minor Plaintiff Jane Doe on the day of the sexual
assault, that the minor Jane Doe was known to have a reputation for having sexual relations with
boys and/or for being promiscuous.
20
66. That the statements by Mack Burgess were made with knowledge of their falsity
or with reckless disregard for the truth of the statements.
67. That as a direct, proximate and foreseeable result of the false statements by Mack
Burgess, the minor Plaintiff’s reputation was been injured, in an amount to be determined by the
trier of fact.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request the following:
i. Trial by Jury;
ii. Judgment against Defendant for actual and compensatory damages in an

amount to be determined by the jury;
iii. Costs and reasonable attorney’s fees; and
iv. For such other relief as this fair and honorable Court may deem just and
proper.
Respectfully submitted,
KNIGHT & WHITTINGTON, LLC
S/Matthew T. Douglas____________
Matthew T. Douglas
207 East Third North St.
PO Box 280
Summerville, SC 29484
(P) 843-821-9700
(F) 843-821-0031
mdouglas@knightwhittington.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
Summerville, South Carolina
May 31, 2018
21

LG v Williamsburg County School District - Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

LG v Williamsburg County School District - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2018 May 31 9:42 PM - WILLIAMSBURG - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2018CP4500244

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

TO THE DEFENDANT ABOVE NAMED:

against you in the relief demanded in the Complaint.

KNIGHT & WHITTINGTON, LLC

Attorney for Plaintiff

Summerville, South Carolina

May 31, 2018

to allege and show unto the Court the following:

PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

1. Plaintiffs are citizens and residents of Williamsburg County, South Carolina.

communication to maintain the confidentiality of that information.

2. Defendant Williamsburg County School District (“WCSD” or “Defendant”) is a

by and through its agents, servants, employees and/or officers.

3. Kingstree Middle Magnet School (“KMMS”) is an entity operated by Defendant

4. At all times complained of herein, the administrators, faculty, staff, agents,

the Defendant in a separate communication.

restroom and shouted SA’s name.

sexually assaulted/raped against her will by SA.

employee, servant, officer, and/or representative of Defendant.

sexual contact occurred between him and Jane Doe.

called out SA’s name.

hospital and reported the sexual assault/rape to the police department.

him that Jane Doe was not going to be expelled.

statements to law enforcement.

of Jane Doe to the Kingstree Police Department.

KMMS on the school premises prior to the assault on Jane Doe.

assault female students at KMMS causing them personal injury.

placed Victim 1 on the school bus to ride home.

sexual assault to law enforcement or any other agency.

for sexual misconduct.

Kingstree Police Department notify her as to the findings of their investigation.

herein and as may be shown at the trial of this case.

unsupervised for any period of time at the school.

39. WCSD attempted to conceal allegations of student on student sexual misconduct

investigating allegations of sexual misconduct involving minors; e) not following discipline

ways as alleged herein and as the evidence at trial may show.

regards to Plaintiff Jane Doe.

Doe and Victim 1.

inability to trust adults in positions of authority, difficulty in maintaining intimate relationships,

appears likely at this time.

as the minor Plaintiff matures, which appears likely at this time.

damages; and loss of services of her daughter.

as if fully set forth herein verbatim.

standards, and Defendant’s own policies and procedures.

S.C. Code Ann. § 15-78-60 (25).

53. Based on the knowledge, actual or constructive, of WCSD, Defendant, SA should

grounds during school hours.

more, or all of the following particulars:

a. Failure to apply corrective measures when staff, employees, agents,

b. Failure to terminate the employment of staff, employees, agents, and/or

c. Failure to hire and train staff, employees, agents, and/or servants to

d. Failure to follow policies and procedures regarding supervision,

e. Failure to train and monitor staff, employees, agents, and/or servants to

f. Failure to train staff, employees, agents, and/or servants in proper and

g. Failing to have proper policies and procedures regarding supervision,

h. Even if such policies and procedures exist, failure to properly implement

i. Failure to supervise staff, employees, agents, and/or servants in applying

j. Failure to recognize and prevent the escalation of sexual discrimination

k. Failure to train staff, employees, agents, and/or servants in recognizing and

l. Failure to prevent student on student sexual discrimination and misconduct

n. Failure to implement adequate supervision, security or safety measures

q. Conscious failure to prevent instances of student on student sexual

r. Conscious failure to report allegations or instances of student on student