Preview
NAILAH K. BYRD
CUYAHOGA COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS
1200 Ontario Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44113
Court of Common Pleas
BRIEF IN OPPOSITION
October 16,2023 14:06
By: DAVID J. SIPUSIC 0073699
Confirmation Nbr. 2991505
TAGREED DAOUD, ET AL. CV 22 966739
vs.
Judge: DEBORAH M. TURNER
MENLO PARK ACADEMY, ET AL.
Pages Filed: 5
Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO
TAGREED DAOUD, et al., ) CASE NO.: CV-22-966739
)
Plaintiffs, ) JUDGE: DEBORAH M. TURNER
)
vs. ) defendants' brief in opposition
) to plaintiffs' motion to compel
MENLO PARK ACADEMY, et al., ) production of alleged ferpa
) protected documents
Defendants. )
)
Now come Defendants, Parma City School District Board of Education, John Doe Bus
Driver and John Doe Entities 4-5, by and through counsel Mazanec, Raskin & Ryder Co., LPA,
and respectfully submit this brief in opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of
Alleged FERPA Protected Documents.
Respectfully submitted,
MAZANEC, RASKIN & RYDER CO., L.P.A.
/s/David J. Sipusic____________________
JAMES A. CLIMER (0001532)
DAVID J. SIPUSIC (0073699)
100 Franklin’s Row
34305 Solon Road
Cleveland, OH 44139
(440) 248-7906
(440) 248-8861 - Fax
Email: jclimer@mrrlaw.com
dsipusic@mrrlaw.com
Counselfor Defendants Parma City School District
Board ofEducation, John Doe Bus Driver and John
Doe Entities 4-5
Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW
memorandum in support
i. introduction
This matter arises out of the alleged brandishing of an object on or about April 5, 2022, by
an eighth-grade student attending Defendant Menlo Park Academy while being transported on a
Parma City School bus. (See generally, Complaint.) The parties have become aware of a single
video that may contain information relevant to the claims in the Complaint. The video is property
of the Parma City School District and at a recent status conference with the Court, the parties
expressed concern that the video cannot be released absent a court order and notice to the parents
of the students appearing in the video to avoid any potential violation of FERPA laws. The Court
proceeded to order this matter briefed and the Plaintiffs submitted their Motion to Compel the
video on October 2, 2023. This memorandum serves at the opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion.
11. law and argument
a. The Video Cannot be Produced Absent a Court Order
Defendant Parma City School District does not dispute that based on the allegations
contained in the Complaint, the video may be relevant and indeed, may be supportive of the various
claims and defenses of both Menlo Park Academy and the Parma City School District. However,
FERPA, "protects educational records or personally identifiable information from improper
disclosure." Jackson v. Willoughby Eastlake Sch. Dist., N.D. Ohio No. 1:16CV310O, 2018 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 49508, at *6 (Mar. 23, 2018); citing Richardson v. Board ofEduc., No. 3:12CV00342,
2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32290, 2014 WL 8619228, at *1 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 11, 2014, 2014); quoting
Doe v. Woodford County Bd. of Educ., 213 F.3d 921, 926 (6th Cir. 2000); see also United States
v. Miami University, 294 F.gd 797, 806 (6th Cir. 2002) (FERPA protects privacy interests of
students and their parents); Ellis v. Cleveland Mun. Sch. Dist., 309 F.Supp.2d 1019, 1022 (N.D.
Ohio 2004).
Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW
Based on the above, a school district is typically prohibited from disclosing the educational
records or personally identifiable information of students under 18 years of age (“minor students”)
without first notifying the parents of the minor students appearing on the video and giving them
the opportunity to object, or if the student is over the age of 18, the opportunity to provide written
consent.
Plaintiffs do cite a potential exception regarding disclosure of certain education records in
compliance with a judicial order. Specifically, 20 U.S.C.§1232g(b)(2)(B) which states:
“(B) Except as provided in paragraph (1)(J), such information is furnished in
compliance with judicial order, or pursuant to any lawfully issued subpoena, upon
condition that parents and the students are notified of all such orders or subpoenas
in advance of the compliance therewith by the educational institution or agency,
except when a parent is a party to a court proceeding involving child abuse and
neglect (as defined in section 3 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act
(42 U.S.C. 5101 note)) or dependency matters, and the order is issued in the context
of that proceeding, additional notice to the parent by the educational agency or
institution is not required.”
20 U.S.C. §1232g(b)(2)(B)
Based on the above, Defendant Parma City School District objects to the current format of
Plaintiffs’ proposed Order and submits that if this Court chooses to order the production of the
video, the Parma City School District would be required to notify the minor students’ parents in
advance of producing the video, that it was being produced pursuant to a court order. Also, the
parties in this case have entered into a protective order and Defendant Parma City School District
submits that any production of the video would also be subject to the terms of the protective order.
iii. conclusion
As discussed above, prior to any production of an educational record in this case, a judicial
order would have to be issued requiring said production and the Parma City School District would
then be required by U.S.C. §1232g(b)(2)(B) to notify the parents of the minor students that it is
Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW
producing the record pursuant to a judicial order. Further, such production would need to comply
with the terms of the protective order, which may include an in-camera viewing of the video
involving the parties to this case.
Respectfully submitted,
MAZANEC, RASKIN & RYDER CO., L.P.A.
/s/David J. Sipusic____________________
JAMES A. CLIMER (0001532)
DAVID J. SIPUSIC (0073699)
100 Franklin’s Row
34305 Solon Road
Cleveland, OH 44139
(440) 248-7906
(440) 248-8861 - Fax
Email: jclimer@mrrlaw.com
dsipusic@mrrlaw.com
Counselfor Defendants Parma City School District
Board ofEducation, John Doe Bus Driver and John
Doe Entities 4-5
Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW
certificate of service
A copy of the foregoing Defendants' Brief in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel
Production of Alleged FERPA Protected Documents was filed electronically on October 16, 2023,
and served to all registered parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system.
s/David J. Sipusic____________________
JAMES A. CLIMER (0001532)
DAVID J. SIPUSIC (0073699)
Counselfor Defendants Parma City School District
Board ofEducation, John Doe Bus Driver and John
Doe Entities 4-5
Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW
Preview
NAILAH K. BYRD CUYAHOGA COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS 1200 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Court of Common Pleas BRIEF IN OPPOSITION October 16,2023 14:06 By: DAVID J. SIPUSIC 0073699 Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 TAGREED DAOUD, ET AL. CV 22 966739 vs. Judge: DEBORAH M. TURNER MENLO PARK ACADEMY, ET AL. Pages Filed: 5 Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO TAGREED DAOUD, et al., ) CASE NO.: CV-22-966739 ) Plaintiffs, ) JUDGE: DEBORAH M. TURNER ) vs. ) defendants' brief in opposition ) to plaintiffs' motion to compel MENLO PARK ACADEMY, et al., ) production of alleged ferpa ) protected documents Defendants. ) ) Now come Defendants, Parma City School District Board of Education, John Doe Bus Driver and John Doe Entities 4-5, by and through counsel Mazanec, Raskin & Ryder Co., LPA, and respectfully submit this brief in opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Alleged FERPA Protected Documents. Respectfully submitted, MAZANEC, RASKIN & RYDER CO., L.P.A. /s/David J. Sipusic____________________ JAMES A. CLIMER (0001532) DAVID J. SIPUSIC (0073699) 100 Franklin’s Row 34305 Solon Road Cleveland, OH 44139 (440) 248-7906 (440) 248-8861 - Fax Email: jclimer@mrrlaw.com dsipusic@mrrlaw.com Counselfor Defendants Parma City School District Board ofEducation, John Doe Bus Driver and John Doe Entities 4-5 Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW memorandum in support i. introduction This matter arises out of the alleged brandishing of an object on or about April 5, 2022, by an eighth-grade student attending Defendant Menlo Park Academy while being transported on a Parma City School bus. (See generally, Complaint.) The parties have become aware of a single video that may contain information relevant to the claims in the Complaint. The video is property of the Parma City School District and at a recent status conference with the Court, the parties expressed concern that the video cannot be released absent a court order and notice to the parents of the students appearing in the video to avoid any potential violation of FERPA laws. The Court proceeded to order this matter briefed and the Plaintiffs submitted their Motion to Compel the video on October 2, 2023. This memorandum serves at the opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion. 11. law and argument a. The Video Cannot be Produced Absent a Court Order Defendant Parma City School District does not dispute that based on the allegations contained in the Complaint, the video may be relevant and indeed, may be supportive of the various claims and defenses of both Menlo Park Academy and the Parma City School District. However, FERPA, "protects educational records or personally identifiable information from improper disclosure." Jackson v. Willoughby Eastlake Sch. Dist., N.D. Ohio No. 1:16CV310O, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49508, at *6 (Mar. 23, 2018); citing Richardson v. Board ofEduc., No. 3:12CV00342, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32290, 2014 WL 8619228, at *1 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 11, 2014, 2014); quoting Doe v. Woodford County Bd. of Educ., 213 F.3d 921, 926 (6th Cir. 2000); see also United States v. Miami University, 294 F.gd 797, 806 (6th Cir. 2002) (FERPA protects privacy interests of students and their parents); Ellis v. Cleveland Mun. Sch. Dist., 309 F.Supp.2d 1019, 1022 (N.D. Ohio 2004). Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW Based on the above, a school district is typically prohibited from disclosing the educational records or personally identifiable information of students under 18 years of age (“minor students”) without first notifying the parents of the minor students appearing on the video and giving them the opportunity to object, or if the student is over the age of 18, the opportunity to provide written consent. Plaintiffs do cite a potential exception regarding disclosure of certain education records in compliance with a judicial order. Specifically, 20 U.S.C.§1232g(b)(2)(B) which states: “(B) Except as provided in paragraph (1)(J), such information is furnished in compliance with judicial order, or pursuant to any lawfully issued subpoena, upon condition that parents and the students are notified of all such orders or subpoenas in advance of the compliance therewith by the educational institution or agency, except when a parent is a party to a court proceeding involving child abuse and neglect (as defined in section 3 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5101 note)) or dependency matters, and the order is issued in the context of that proceeding, additional notice to the parent by the educational agency or institution is not required.” 20 U.S.C. §1232g(b)(2)(B) Based on the above, Defendant Parma City School District objects to the current format of Plaintiffs’ proposed Order and submits that if this Court chooses to order the production of the video, the Parma City School District would be required to notify the minor students’ parents in advance of producing the video, that it was being produced pursuant to a court order. Also, the parties in this case have entered into a protective order and Defendant Parma City School District submits that any production of the video would also be subject to the terms of the protective order. iii. conclusion As discussed above, prior to any production of an educational record in this case, a judicial order would have to be issued requiring said production and the Parma City School District would then be required by U.S.C. §1232g(b)(2)(B) to notify the parents of the minor students that it is Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW producing the record pursuant to a judicial order. Further, such production would need to comply with the terms of the protective order, which may include an in-camera viewing of the video involving the parties to this case. Respectfully submitted, MAZANEC, RASKIN & RYDER CO., L.P.A. /s/David J. Sipusic____________________ JAMES A. CLIMER (0001532) DAVID J. SIPUSIC (0073699) 100 Franklin’s Row 34305 Solon Road Cleveland, OH 44139 (440) 248-7906 (440) 248-8861 - Fax Email: jclimer@mrrlaw.com dsipusic@mrrlaw.com Counselfor Defendants Parma City School District Board ofEducation, John Doe Bus Driver and John Doe Entities 4-5 Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW certificate of service A copy of the foregoing Defendants' Brief in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Production of Alleged FERPA Protected Documents was filed electronically on October 16, 2023, and served to all registered parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system. s/David J. Sipusic____________________ JAMES A. CLIMER (0001532) DAVID J. SIPUSIC (0073699) Counselfor Defendants Parma City School District Board ofEducation, John Doe Bus Driver and John Doe Entities 4-5 Electronically Filed 10/16/2023 14:06 / BRIEF / CV 22 966739 / Confirmation Nbr. 2991505 / CLAMW