Complaint,Petition: F. L. R. VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

On March 12, 2024 a Complaint,Petition was filed involving a dispute between and Los Angeles Unified School District, for Civil Rights/Discrimination (General Jurisdiction) in the District Court of Los Angeles County.

Preview
1 Rosa K. Hirji (SBN 204722)
rosa@rkhlawoffice.com
2 Robert D. Skeels (SBN 325896)
robert@rkhlawoffice.com
3 LAW OFFICES OF HIRJI & CHAU, LLP
5173 Overland Avenue
4 Culver City, CA 90230
Tel: (310) 391-0330 // Fax: (310) 943-0311
5
Attorneys for Plaintiff, F.L.R., a minor, by and through
6 his Guardian ad Litem, Fernando Luna
7

8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
10

11 F.L.R., a minor, by and through his Guardian Case Number (TBD):
ad Litem, Fernando Luna, Judge: Unassigned
12 Department: Unassigned
Plaintiff,
13
v. COMPLAINT FOR MONETARY
14 DAMAGES FOR VIOLATIONS OF:
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL 1. Americans with Disabilities Act (42
15 U.S.C. §12131, et seq. & 42 U.S.C.
DISTRICT; and DOES 1 through 15,
16 §12181, et seq.);
Defendants. 2. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
17 of 1973 (29 U.S.C. §§794, et seq.);
3. California Government Code
18 §11135;
4. California Education Code §§200 &
19
220;
20 5. Negligence;
6. Negligence Per Se;
21 7. Negligent Hiring, Training, and/or
Retaining;
22 8. Negligent Infliction of Emotional
Distress.
23

24 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

26 Plaintiff F.L.R. (“Plaintiff” or “F.L.R.”), a disabled minor, by and through his guardian

27 Ad Litem, Fernando Luna (“Parent”), brings this action to recover monetary damages for injuries

28 suffered as a consequence of Defendants LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, and

1
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 DOES 1–15, (collectively “Defendants”)] violation of disability antidiscrimination laws, and
2 other state laws.
3 In support of this Complaint (the “Complaint”), Plaintiff allege as follows:
4 INTRODUCTION
5 1. Plaintiff F.L.R. is a ten-year-old student, who was the victim sexual assault and severe
6 and pervasive bullying at school.
7 2. Defendant LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (“LAUSD” or “District”)
8 and DOES 1 through 15, failed to protect and create a safe school environment for Plaintiff
9 F.L.R. resulting in his injuries.
10 3. Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, abdicated their responsibilities by failing
11 to monitor F.L.R.’s safety at Meyler Street Elementary School. There F.L.R. experienced
12 bullying by peers, which culminated to him being sexually assaulted on February 2, 2023.
13 Plaintiff has suffered physical injuries and emotional distress.
14 4. Defendants’ actions and/or inaction were the cause of his injuries.
15 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
16 5. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this Complaint pursuant to
17 California Constitution, article VI, section 10.
18 6. The incidents giving rise to this action took place in Torrance, California, and
19 therefore venue is proper in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, Southern
20 District or the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, Central District as per Local
21 Rules of the Court, Rule 2.3(a)(1)(B).
22 GOVERNMENT CLAIMS REQUIREMENT
23 7. On May 16, 2023, Plaintiff filed his Government Tort Claim pursuant to California
24 Government Code section 910 et seq. against LAUSD.
25 8. On September 12, 2023, Defendant LAUSD denied Plaintiff’s Government Tort
26 Claim in writing.
27 9. Plaintiff has thus complied with the requirements of Government Code Section 910,
28 et. seq., and is timely filing his Complaint.

2
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 PARTIES
2 Plaintiff
3 10. Plaintiff F.L.R. is disabled minor presently residing in Torrance, California, in the
4 County of Los Angeles. He currently attends Slauson Learning Center, a non-public school
5 (“NPS”) contracted by LAUSD.
6 11. Fernando Luna is, and at all times pertinent to this Complaint has been, a natural
7 person residing in Torrance, California, in the County of Los Angeles. Fernando Luna seeks
8 from this Court an appointment as Guardian Ad Litem upon filing this Complaint.
9 Defendants
10 12. Defendant LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT (“LAUSD” or “District”)
11 is, and at all times relevant was, a “public entity” and was acting as a public entity within the
12 provisions of Government Code section 811.2, and a Unified School District as defined by
13 Education Code section 83, whose territorial jurisdiction lies within the County of Los Angeles,
14 State of California.
15 13. Defendant Meyler Street Elementary School (“Meyler ES”) is a public elementary
16 school that provides education for Kindergarten through 5th grade students, and offers special
17 education services to eligible students under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
18 (“IDEA”). Meyler ES is a part of the Los Angeles Unified School District.
19 14. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise of
20 Defendants, DOES 1 through 15, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff who therefore sues said
21 Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that
22 each of the Defendants herein designated as a DOE are responsible in some manner for the
23 events and happenings herein referred to and caused injuries and damages proximately thereby
24 as hereinafter alleged. When Plaintiff ascertains the true names and capacities of the DOE
25 Defendants, he will amend this Complaint to identify them properly.
26 FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS
27 15. Plaintiff is a student with disabilities who is eligible for special education and related
28 services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”). The IDEA requires

3
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 that Plaintiff receive an Individualized Education Program (“IEP”) that lays out his needs and
2 the services to be provided by the school that will best meet those needs.
3 16. F.L.R.’s disabilities substantially limited his major life activities including his ability
4 to learn, communicate, interact with others, and attend school.
5 17. On August 27, 2015, Defendant LAUSD conducted a psycho-educational evaluation
6 and found that he met the eligibility criteria for special education under developmental delay.
7 Because F.L.R. is a child with developmental delay, the District was on notice that he required
8 constant supervision for his safety.
9 18. On November 5, 2018, Defendant LAUSD conducted a re-evaluation. F.L.R. was
10 observed to not interact with peers and it was reported to the assessor that he did not interact
11 with peers.
12 19. In the third and fourth grade, F.L.R. continued exhibiting social-emotional difficulties.
13 F.L.R. did not possess requisite skills to navigate the school environment, or make progress in
14 his social, behavioral and emotional needs.
15 20. During the beginning in the 2020-2021 school year, F.L.R. was continuously bullied.
16 The District was then put on notice that F.L.R. was being severely and pervasively bullied,
17 especially in the restroom.
18 21. On February 2, 2021, Defendant LAUSD drafted a safety plan that required constant
19 supervision for F.L.R. while he was in the restroom and also provided for F.L.R. to use
20 alternative restrooms like the one in the nurse’s office.
21 22. As of the start of the 2021-2022 school year, Defendant LAUSD was on notice that
22 F.L.R. was experiencing ongoing social-emotional difficulties and that he was still the victim of
23 severe and pervasively bullying.
24 23. On October 22, 2021, the District presented Parents with an assessment plan, but
25 failed schedule a meeting to substantively address the bullying F.L.R. was suffering through an
26 updated safety plan.
27 24. Parents are monolingual Spanish speaking and were not informed that Defendant
28 LAUSD has an obligation to conduct a safety plan meeting when safety is at issue.

4
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 25. On November 30, 2021, Defendant LAUSD conducted an IEP for F.L.R., but failed to
2 discuss the bullying and safety issues that were occurring on an ongoing basis. Accordingly, the
3 District failed to substantively address the severe and pervasive bullying F.L.R. was suffering
4 by drafting an updated safety plan.
5 26. At the start of the 2022-2023 school year, Defendant LAUSD was on notice that
6 F.L.R. was experiencing ongoing social-emotional difficulties and was still being severely and
7 pervasively bullied.
8 27. On November 30, 2022, Defendant LAUSD held an IEP, but failed to substantively
9 address the severe and pervasive bullying F.L.R. was suffering by drafting an update to his
10 safety plan.
11 28. The bullying continued unabated. F.L.R. was in constant fear for his safety. Due to his
12 developmental delay and deficits in social and emotional skills, F.L.R. was and is particularly
13 vulnerable to being targeted and injured by bullying because he does not have sufficient
14 capacity to take safety precautions, and does not have the social-emotional resources to cope
15 with its aftermath.
16 29. On or about February 1, 2023, F.L.R. was cornered by his bullies in the restroom, a
17 group of nine students in the grade above him. The bullies broke his phone. The bullies starting
18 hitting F.L.R. multiple times on various parts of his body, then pulled down his pants, and
19 digitally assaulted him in the rectum. The resulting penetration of his rectum caused F.L.R.
20 extreme pain and terror.
21 30. The District failed to provide supervision in the restroom, even though F.L.R. had a
22 safety plan that expressly provided for supervision when he was in the restroom. Because the
23 District failed to discuss and substantively address the bullying issues, the need for his existing
24 safety plan was never memorialized or carried over to the 4th grade school year.
25 31. Defendants Meyler ES and District failed to report the incident to Parents, but F.L.R.
26 told his coach and the coach informed Parents of the sexual assault of their child.
27 32. During the assault and sexual abuse, F.L.R. experienced terror and excruciating pain.
28 Immediately afterwards, he felt extreme pain in his rectum, and suffered bruising and abrasions

5
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 on his arm, chest, and left lower leg.
2 33. On February 2, 2023, F.L.R. was seen in the emergency room at Harbor UCLA
3 Pediatrics. The medical report from that visit notes that F.L.R. complained of “rectal pain” and
4 recorded bruising on F.L.R.’s chest wall and right lateral thigh.
5 34. On February 7, 2023, F.L.R. underwent a forensic medical examination at Harbor
6 UCLA Pediatrics.
7 35. F.L.R.’s doctor excused him from attending school from February 2, 2023 through
8 March 6, 2023, until his severe trauma has subsided to manageable levels.
9 36. F.L.R. was severely traumatized by the incident. He exhibits traumatic symptoms
10 including nightmares, startles easily, and cries often. He feared returning to school, did not trust
11 the school in ensuring his safety, and refused to return. He is afraid of running into the bullies.
12 37. The February 2, 2023 sexual assault caused a substantial detriment to F.L.R.’s
13 physical and mental health.
14 38. After the February 2, 2023 incident, Parents met with school representatives, including
15 the Principal at Defendant Meyler ES, who had previously sat in on F.L.R.’s meetings. Parents
16 requested an updated safety plan on four separate occasions. At each of these meetings, the
17 school officials denied the request.
18 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
The Americans with Disabilities Act
19
42 U.S.C. §§12101, et seq.
20 42 U.S.C. §§12181, et seq.
(By Plaintiff against All Defendants)
21
39. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in each of the foregoing
22
paragraphs, and incorporates them herein as if separately alleged.
23
40. Defendant LAUSD is a public entity within the meaning of Title II of the Americans
24
with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). See 42 U.S.C. 12131(1).
25
41. Under Title II of the ADA, a qualified individual with a disability may not, be
26
excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of services, programs, or activities of a
27
public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity. See 42 U.S.C. §12132.
28

6
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 42. By virtue of his disabilities as described in Paragraphs 15 and 16, inclusive, F.L.R. is a
2 qualified individual with a disability within the meaning of the ADA and regulations issued
3 thereunder.
4 43. Defendant LAUSD knew about F.L.R.’s disability related needs as described in
5 Paragraphs 17 through 22, inclusive.
6 44. Pursuant to the ADA, Defendant LAUSD was prohibited from employing standards,
7 criteria, or methods of administration that have the effect of discriminating against a person on
8 the basis of their disability. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(1)(D).
9 45. Pursuant to the ADA, Defendant LAUSD was prohibited from engaging in
10 discrimination in the form of the failure to make reasonable modifications in its policies,
11 practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford access to the services
12 of the entity. 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(2)(A)(ii).
13 46. Defendant LAUSD and its employees breached the aforementioned duties under the
14 ADA when Defendant LAUSD failed to implement F.L.R.’s safety plan, which required
15 constant supervision while in the restroom and the ability to use alternative restrooms, as
16 described in Paragraphs 21, 30, and 31, inclusive.
17 47. Defendant LAUSD and its employees breached the aforementioned duties under the
18 ADA when failed to supervise, monitor and protect F.L.R. from the severe and pervasive
19 bullying and battery, as well as sexual assault, as described in Paragraphs 21 through 32,
20 inclusive.
21 48. Defendant LAUSD’s actions, particularly its failure to implement F.L.R.’s safety plan,
22 which required constant supervision while in the restroom and the ability to use alternative
23 restrooms, were deliberately indifferent to F.L.R.’s disability and rights under the ADA.
24 49. Defendant LAUSD’s actions, which resulted in a weeks-long medical leave from
25 school and continuing trauma and emotional distress, denied F.L.R. the benefit of its programs
26 and subjected him to discrimination due to his disabilities.
27 50. As a proximate and foreseeable result of Defendant LAUSD’s breach of its duties,
28 F.L.R. suffered (1) injuries to his civil rights, denial of access to services, and discrimination;

7
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 (2) pain and suffering including physical injuries; (3) special damages; and (4) loss of
2 educational opportunities, due to his weeks-long medical leave as a result of the physical and
3 emotional damage from the sexual assault, and future medical and mental health costs.
4 51. As a result of the aforementioned injuries, Plaintiff is entitled to nominal, special,
5 general damages for pain and suffering, attorney fees and costs. In addition, Plaintiff seeks
6 equitable and injunctive relief.
7 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
8
29 U.S.C. §§794, et seq.
9 (By Plaintiff against All Defendants)

10 52. Plaintiff incorporated by reference the allegation contained in each of the foregoing
11 paragraphs, and incorporate them herein as if separately alleged.
12 53. Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (“Rehabilitation Act”), a qualified
13 individual with a disability may not, solely by reason of his disability, be subjected to
14 discrimination, excluded from participation in, or denied the benefits of, any program or activity
15 receiving federal financial assistance. 29 U.S.C. §794(a).
16 54. Defendant LAUSD receives federal funding. Accordingly, it is subject to the
17 Rehabilitation Act.
18 55. By virtue of his disability as described in Paragraphs 15 and 16, inclusive, F.L.R. is a
19 qualified individual with a disability within the meaning of the Rehabilitation Act and
20 regulations issued thereunder.
21 56. Pursuant to the Rehabilitation Act, Defendant LAUSD owed F.L.R. a general duty not
22 to deny him access to the benefits of its programs on the basis of disability, as well as corollary
23 specific duties to ensure that he was provided with the aids, benefits and services he required
24 during school hours to ensure that he had access to the LAUSD’S educational services.
25 57. Defendant LAUSD did know or should have known that F.L.R. required constant
26 supervision in the school restroom as required by F.L.R.’s safety plan, to receive the benefits of
27 the program and service at Meyler ES.
28 58. Defendant LAUSD and its employees, acting in deliberate indifference to F.L.R.’s

8
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 disability and rights under the Rehabilitation Act, breached the foregoing duties when it denied
2 him access to the LAUSD’S benefits of its program, activity or service by failing to provide him
3 with constant supervision in the school restroom, as required by F.L.R.’s safety plan.
4 59. Defendant LAUSD and its employees, acting in deliberate indifference to F.L.R.’s
5 disability and rights under the Rehabilitation Act, breached the foregoing duties when it failed to
6 provide F.L.R. with reasonable accommodations, related aids and services including but not
7 limited to the constant supervision in the school restroom required by F.L.R.’s safety plan, as
8 described in Paragraphs 17 through 21, and 21, 30, and 31, inclusive.
9 60. Defendant LAUSD and its employees, acting in deliberate indifference to F.L.R.’s
10 disability and rights under the Rehabilitation Act, breached the foregoing duties when it failed to
11 prevent a hostile learning environment caused by severe and pervasive disability-based bullying,
12 despite being on notice of previous bullying incidents, as described in Paragraphs 20, 22, 26,
13 and 28, inclusive.
14 61. As a proximate and foreseeable result of Defendant LAUSD’s breach of its duties
15 F.L.R. suffered (1) injuries to his civil rights, denial of access to services, and discrimination;
16 (2) pain and suffering including physical injuries; (3) special damages; and (4) loss of
17 educational opportunities due to his weeks-long medical leave as a result of the physical and
18 emotional damage from the sexual assault, and future medical and mental health costs.
19 62. As a result of the aforementioned injuries, Plaintiff is entitled to nominal, special,
20 general damages for pain and suffering, attorney fees and costs. In addition, Plaintiff seeks
21 equitable and injunctive relief.
22 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of California Government Code section 11135
23
(By Plaintiff against All Defendants)
24
63. Plaintiff incorporated by reference the allegation contained in each of the foregoing
25
paragraphs, and incorporate them herein as if separately alleged.
26
64. California Government Code section 11135 states in relevant part that “[N]o person in
27
the State of California shall on the basis of . . . mental disability, physical disability, . . . be
28

9
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 unlawfully denied full and equal access to the benefits of, or be unlawfully subjected to
2 discrimination under, any program or activity that is conducted, operated, or administered by the
3 state or by any state agency, is funded directly by the state, or receives any financial assistance
4 from the state.”
5 65. California Government Code § 11135(b) incorporates the protections and prohibitions
6 contained in the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and its implementing regulations.
7 66. F.L.R. is a protected class member within the meaning of Government Code § 11135.
8 Cal. Gov’t Code § 12926 (j).
9 67. At all times relevant, Defendant LAUSD received financial assistance from the State
10 of California within the meaning of Government Code § 11135 et seq.
11 68. At all times herein alleged Defendant LAUSD has violated California Government
12 Code Section 11135 in that LAUSD conduct alleged herein constitutes violations of the ADA
13 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
14 69. At all times herein alleged Defendant LAUSD has failed to provide F.L.R. with full
15 and equal access to its facilities, programs, services and activities as required by California
16 Government Code § 11135 et seq.
17 70. As a proximate and foreseeable result of Defendant LAUSD’s breach of its duties,
18 F.L.R. suffered (1) injuries to his civil rights, denial of access to services, and discrimination;
19 (2) pain and suffering including physical injuries; (3) emotional distress emotional distress in
20 the form of serious emotional distress, trauma, and humiliation; (4) special damages; and (5)
21 loss of educational opportunities, and future medical and mental health costs.
22 71. As a result of the aforementioned injuries, Plaintiff is entitled to nominal, special,
23 general damages for pain and suffering, attorney fees and costs. In addition, Plaintiff seeks
24 equitable and injunctive relief.
25 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
26 Violation of California Education Code sections 200 and 220
(By Plaintiff against All Defendants)
27

28 72. Plaintiff incorporated by reference the allegation contained in each of the foregoing

10
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 paragraphs, and incorporate them herein as if separately alleged.
2 73. California Education Code Section 200 states in relevant part that “[i]t is the policy of
3 the State of policy of the State of California to afford all persons in public schools, regardless of
4 their disability, ...equal rights and opportunities in the educational institutions of the state.
5 74. California Education Code Section 220 provides liability against the school district
6 when a student is subject to “discrimination on the basis of disability … is contained in the
7 definition of hate crimes set forth in Section 422.55 of the Penal Code, … in any program or
8 activity conducted by an educational institution that receives, or benefits from, state financial
9 assistance, or enrolls pupils who receive state student financial aid.”
10 75. At all times relevant to this action, F.L.R. was and is a qualified individual within the
11 meaning of the California Education Code Section 220 as defined by California Education Code
12 Section 210.1.
13 76. At all times herein alleged Defendant LAUSD has violated California Education Code
14 Section 220 in that its conduct alleged herein constitutes violations of the ADA, and Section 504
15 of the Rehabilitation Act.
16 77. As a proximate result of Defendant LAUSD’s violation of California Education Code
17 Section 220, Plaintiff has been injured as set forth herein. Unless enjoined, Defendant LAUSD's
18 conduct will continue to inflict injuries for which Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.
19 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Negligence and Negligent Supervision
20
(By Plaintiff against All Defendants)
21

22 78. Plaintiff incorporated by reference the allegation contained in each of the foregoing
23 paragraphs, and incorporate them herein as if separately alleged.
24 79. Defendants LAUSD and DOES 1 through 15, owed F.L.R. a heightened duty to
25 exercise reasonable care for the health and safety during school hours including the duty to
26 maintain order and foster a harassment free environment, as well as a corollary specific duty to
27 supervise F.L.R. at all times, while in the restroom, and use reasonable measures to protect him
28 from foreseeable injury. This means observing and preventing physical, emotional, and mental

11
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 harm to F.L.R.
2 80. Defendants LAUSD and DOES 1 through 15, owed F.L.R. a heightened duty of care
3 to provide a safe campus with a multi-faceted tiered system of support, including strategies to
4 prevent, respond to, and recover from incidents of bullying, as well as corollary specific duties
5 to uphold the standards of inclusion, respect and civility and foster an understanding that
6 bullying, hazing, harassment, and discrimination are unacceptable, inappropriate, and harmful.
7 81. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees, including, but not limited to DOES 1 through
8 15, allowed students to severely and pervasively physically bully F.L.R., which culminated in a
9 violent incident of sexual assault. Defendants and their employees and agents, including but not
10 limited to DOES 1 through 15, were aware or had reasonable suspicion of the bullying as it was
11 apparent and transpired on Meyler ES grounds. Moreover, F.L.R.’s prior and then existing safety
12 plans expressly provided for restroom supervision, meaning the District was on notice of the
13 potential danger of F.L.R. using the restroom unsupervised.
14 82. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant LAUSD, and its
15 employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES 1 through 15, negligently and
16 carelessly committed, or omitted, acts, so as to cause injury and damage to Plaintiff. Defendant
17 LAUSD was negligent with respect to supervising, teaching, and advising students. As a result of
18 the bullying, battery, and sexual assault suffered by Plaintiff at the hands of other students,
19 Plaintiff suffered physical and mental injuries.
20 83. Prior to the February 2, 2023 incident of sexual assault and bullying of F.L.R. by
21 students, Defendant LAUSD knew or had reasonable suspicion that F.L.R. was being physically
22 and mentally bullied, and understood how vulnerable F.L.R. was to harassment and bullying by
23 other students within Defendant LAUSD’s control due to his disability. Defendant LAUSD, and
24 its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES 1 through 15, failed to properly
25 supervise and prevent students from physically and verbally bullying F.L. In addition, Defendant
26 LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES 1 through 15, failed to
27 document, report, and apply disciplinary actions and interventions in accordance with
28 Defendant’s policies to ensure F.L.R.’s safety.

12
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 84. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES
2 1 through 15, had special duties to protect F.L.R., when such students were entrusted to their
3 care, welfare and physical custody. As such, Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents,
4 including but not limited to DOES 1 through 15, owed F.L.R., a minor disabled child, a special
5 duty of care, in addition to a duty of ordinary care, and owed F.L.R. a higher duty of care that
6 school districts and adults dealing with children owe to protect them from harm. The duty to
7 protect and warn arose from the special, trusting, confidential, and fiduciary relationship between
8 Defendant LAUSD and F.L.R. as Defendant LAUSD stood in loco parentis. F.L.R. and Parents
9 instilled great trust, faith and confidence in Defendant LAUSD.
10 85. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES
11 1 through 15, breached their duties of care to F.L.R. by allowing multiple students to both
12 physically and verbally bully and sexually assault F.L.R. and failed to properly supervise their
13 students.
14 86. F.L.R. is informed and believes and herein alleges that Defendant LAUSD, and its
15 employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES 1 through 15, knew that F.L.R. was
16 experiencing ongoing bullying from other students. These other incidents of bullying had
17 prompted Defendants’ implementation of F.L.R.’s safety plan, which required constant
18 supervision in the school restroom and the ability to use alternative restrooms. Defendants had
19 sufficient time, notice and resources to warn, advise, and correct its actions and take preventative
20 measures.
21 87. Defendant LAUSD, and their employees and agents, including but not limited to
22 DOES 1 through 15, breached their duties through their negligence supervising and/or failing to
23 supervise F.L.R., thus, causing a hostile educational environment by failing to train and instruct
24 employees on how to respond to bullying, failing to provide reasonable corrective action, failing
25 to implement his safety plan, failing to ensure that a school safety and/or discipline review team
26 examined the bullying, failing to monitor the behavior of the bullies, and/or failing to ensure
27 F.L.R.’s safety and well-being while he was attending Meyler ES.
28 88. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES

13
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 1 through 15, breached their duty to Plaintiff by, inter alia, failing to adequately monitor and
2 supervise their students and by failing to stop their students from committing wrongful acts
3 against Plaintiff. This belief is founded on the fact that Plaintiff was informed and believes that
4 the Defendants knew or had reasonable suspicion of the severe and pervasive bullying prior to
5 the February 2, 2023 incident, and failed to investigate the matter.
6 89. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that all of these acts and/or
7 omissions created an unreasonable and foreseeable risk of injury and harm to students attending
8 the school, including Plaintiff.
9 90. Defendant LAUSD is vicariously and otherwise liable for the torts of its employees,
10 including but not limited to, DOES 1 through 15, who were acting within the scope of their
11 employment when they acting intentionally or negligently as alleged herein.
12 91. As a direct and proximate result of the careless and negligent acts and/or omissions of
13 Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, Plaintiff has suffered battery, severe and pervasive
14 bullying, and verbal, emotional, and sexual assaults.
15 92. As a direct and proximate result of the careless and negligent acts and/or omissions of
16 Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, Plaintiff was hurt and injured in his health,
17 strength, and activity, sustaining injury to his body and shock and injury to his nervous system
18 and person. These injuries have caused and continue to cause Plaintiff great mental, physical,
19 and nervous pain and suffering. Plaintiff continues to suffer from emotional distress, trauma,
20 fear, worry, and insecurity associated with the sexual assault. As a result of such physical and
21 emotional injuries, Plaintiff has suffered general damages.
22 93. As a further direct and proximate result of the careless and negligent acts and/or
23 omissions of Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, Plaintiff has incurred medical and
24 other expenses, and Plaintiff will likely incur additional expense in the future.
25 //
26 //
27 //
28 //

14
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
1 Negligence Per Se
2 (By Plaintiff against All Defendants)

3
94. Plaintiff incorporated by reference the allegation contained in each of the foregoing
4
paragraphs, and incorporate them herein as if separately alleged.
5
95. Under California Evidence Code section 669, subdivision (a), negligence is presumed
6
where the defendant violates a statute, the violation directly and proximately causes the
7
plaintiff’s harm, the harm caused is of the kind the statute is designed to prevent, and the
8
plaintiff is a member of the class of persons the statute was designed to protect.
9
96. At all times pertinent to this Complaint, Defendant LAUSD and its employees, Doe
10
Defendants 1-15, owed F.L.R. a mandatory duty of care pursuant to California Education Code
11
section 44807 and California Code of Regulations Title 5 section 5530, which mandate that
12
Defendants exercise ordinary care in supervising the students under its care, and govern the
13
conduct of its employees. The purpose of these provisions is to protect against the harm that was
14
suffered by Plaintiff.
15
97. Defendant LAUSD and its employees, Doe Defendants 1-15, failed to discharge their
16
mandatory duties when they failed to supervise Meyler ES students while they were on campus.
17
Due to their failure to supervise, F.L.R. was severely and pervasively bullied during school
18
hours at Meyler ES, including being sexually assaulted in the school restroom.
19
98. Defendant LAUSD and its employees, DOE Defendants 1-15, had actual knowledge
20
that F.L.R. was suffering from bullying by other students. Defendants had a duty to supervise
21
the bullying students and F.L.R., yet they took no adequate action to stop the bullying.
22
99. Defendant LAUSD and its employees, Doe Defendants 1–10, knew or should have
23
known that their failure to properly supervise, control, and monitor the Meyler ES students
24
would result in serious harm and injury to F.L.R.
25
100. Under California Evidence Code section 669, subdivision (a), Defendants’ breach of
26
California Education Code section 44807 and California Code of Regulations Title 5 section
27
5530, gives rise to presumption of negligence.
28

15
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 101. As a direct and proximate result of the careless and negligent acts and/or omissions of
2 Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, F.L.R. was hurt and injured in his health, strength,
3 and activity, sustaining injury to his body and shock and injury to his nervous system and person.
4 These injuries have caused and continue to cause Plaintiff great mental, physical, and nervous
5 pain and suffering. F.L.R. continues to suffer from emotional distress, trauma, fear, worry, and
6 insecurity associated with the sexual assault. As a result of such physical and emotional injuries,
7 F.L.R. has suffered general damages.
8 102. As a further direct and proximate result of the careless and negligent acts and/or
9 omissions of Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, Plaintiff has incurred medical and
10 other expenses, and Plaintiff will likely incur additional expense in the future.
11 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Negligent Hiring, Training and/or Retaining
12
(By Plaintiff against All Defendants)
13

14 103. Plaintiff incorporated by reference the allegation contained in each of the foregoing
15 paragraphs, and incorporate them herein as if separately alleged.
16 104. At all times herein, California Education Code section 48200 et seq., required
17 Plaintiff’s compulsory attendance in full-time educational classes.
18 105. Defendants LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, owed F.L.R. a heightened duty to
19 exercise reasonable care for his health and safety during school hours including the duty to
20 maintain order and foster a harassment free environment, as well as a corollary specific duty to
21 supervise F.L.R. at all times, while on school grounds, and use reasonable measures to protect
22 him from foreseeable injury. This means observing and preventing physical, emotional, and
23 mental harm to F.L.R.
24 106. Defendants LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, owed F.L.R. a heightened duty of care
25 to provide a safe campus with a multi-faceted tiered system of support, including strategies to
26 prevent, respond to, and recover from incidents of bullying, as well as corollary specific duties
27 to uphold the standards of inclusion, respect and civility and foster an understanding that
28 bullying, hazing, harassment, and discrimination are unacceptable, inappropriate, and harmful.

16
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 107. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES
2 1 through 15, were aware and should have been aware and understood how easily F.L.R., who
3 has a known disability, could be subjective to pervasively physical and verbally bullying by
4 other students within Defendants’ control.
5 108. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES
6 1 through 15, breached their duty to F.L.R. by failing to properly hire, train, and/or retain its
7 administrators, teachers, employees, and staff regarding policies and procedures against
8 bullying, and/or how to appropriately respond to incidents of bullying.
9 109. Alternatively, to Paragraph 108, Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents,
10 including but not limited to DOES 1 through 15, breached their duty to F.L.R. by acting
11 contrary to their training on how to appropriately respond to incidents of bullying when they
12 failed to prevent the bullying and harassment, failed to stop the bullying and harassment, failed
13 to implement the safety plan in accordance with Defendants’ policies to ensure F.L.R.’s safety.
14 110. Defendant LAUSD is vicariously and otherwise liable for the torts of its employees,
15 and administrators who were acting within the scope of their employment when they acted
16 intentionally or negligently as alleged herein.
17 111. As a direct and proximate result of the careless and negligent acts and/or omissions of
18 Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, F.L.R. was hurt and injured in his health, strength,
19 and activity, sustaining injury to his body and shock and injury to his nervous system and
20 person. These injuries have caused and continue to cause F.L.R. great mental, physical, and
21 nervous pain and suffering. F.L.R. continues to suffer from emotional distress, trauma, fear,
22 worry, and insecurity associated with the sexual assault. As a result of such physical and
23 emotional injuries, F.L.R. has suffered general damages.
24 112. As a further direct and proximate result of the careless and negligent acts and/or
25 omissions of Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, Plaintiff has incurred medical and
26 other expenses, and Plaintiff will likely incur additional expense in the future.
27 //
28 //

17
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
1 Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
2 (By Plaintiff against All Defendants)

3 113. Plaintiff incorporated by reference the allegations contained in each of the foregoing

4 paragraphs, and incorporate them herein as if separately alleged.

5 114. Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, owed and owe a heightened duty of care

6 to use reasonable measures to protect F.L.R. from all foreseeable harm, as well as to provide

7 F.L.R. a safe learning environment in which the well-being of F.L.R. is considered and

8 protected. This means observing and preventing physical, emotional, and mental harm to F.L.R.

9 115. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES

10 1 through 15, had special duties to protect F.L.R., when such students were entrusted to their

11 care, welfare and physical custody. As such, Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents,

12 including but not limited to DOES 1 through 15, owed F.L.R., a minor child with disabilities, a

13 special duty of care, in addition to a duty of ordinary care, and owed F.L.R. a higher duty of care

14 that school districts and adults dealing with children owe to protect them from harm. The duty to

15 protect and warn arose from the special, trusting, confidential, and fiduciary relationship between

16 Defendant and F.L.R. as Defendant stood in loco parentis. F.L.R. and Parents instilled great

17 trust, faith and confidence in Defendant.

18 116. Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, owed F.L.R. a heightened duty of care to

19 provide a safe campus with a multi-faceted tiered system of support, including strategies to

20 prevent, respond to, and recover from incidents of bullying, as well as corollary specific duties

21 to uphold the standards of inclusion, respect and civility and foster an understanding that

22 bullying, hazing, harassment, and discrimination are unacceptable, inappropriate, and harmful.

23 117. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES

24 1 through 15, had a special relationship with F.L.R., who was a real and foreseeable victim of the

25 predictable, pervasive, and severe physical and verbal bullying, physical and emotional abuse,

26 and harassment by other students under Defendants’ direction, influence, and control.

27 118. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES

28 1 through 15, were on notice of the physical and verbal bullying that F.L.R. was subject to at the

18
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 hands of peers. Defendant LAUSD was on notice that subjection to severe and pervasive verbal
2 and physical bullying that F.L.R. sustained could result in severe physical injury and emotional
3 distress.
4 119. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES
5 1 through 15, breached their duty of care by failing to adequately supervise their students and to
6 provide F.L.R. a safe and secure campus, with the foreseeable result that F.L.R. was harmed,
7 causing him to suffer physical and emotional harm, humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional
8 distress.
9 120. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES
10 1 through 15, breached their duty of care by enabling the severe and pervasive bullying that
11 F.L.R. sustained at the hands of his peers during their scope their employment, with the
12 foreseeable result that F.L.R. was harmed, causing him to suffer physical and emotional harm,
13 humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional distress.
14 121. Defendant LAUSD, and its employees and agents, including but not limited to DOES
15 1 through 15, breached their duty of care by facilitating and/or creating a traumatic and hostile
16 education environment in which F.L.R. in their care was physically and sexually assaulted by his
17 peers thereby disregarding the rights of F.L.R. in their care to a safe and welcoming school
18 premises, with the foreseeable result that F.L.R. was harmed, causing him to suffer physical and
19 emotional harm, humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional distress.
20 122. As a direct and proximate result of the careless and negligent acts and/or omissions of
21 Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, F.L.R. was hurt and injured in his health, strength,
22 and activity, sustaining injury to his body and shock and injury to his nervous system and person.
23 These injuries have caused and continue to cause F.L.R. great mental, physical, and nervous pain
24 and suffering. F.L.R. continues to suffer from emotional distress, trauma, fear, worry, and
25 insecurity associated with the sexual assault. As a result of such physical and emotional injuries,
26 F.L.R. has suffered general damages.
27 123. As a further direct and proximate result of the careless and negligent acts and/or
28 omissions of Defendant LAUSD, and DOES 1 through 15, F.L.R. has incurred medical and other

19
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 expenses, and F.L.R. will likely incur additional expense in the future.
2 124. Defendant’s negligence was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiff’s serious
3 emotional distress as herein alleged.
4 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
5 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff reserves his right to amend the Complaint up to and including
6 the time of trial to include all theories of recovery and items of damages not yet ascertained, and
7 demands judgment against Defendants, and each of them, as follows:
8 1. For general damages in a sum according to proof;
9 2. For actual and special damages according to proof;
10 3. For injunctive relief ordering the District to ensure F.L.R.’s safety and to hold training for
11 District employees at Meyler ES on proper responses to incidents bullying and
12 appropriately implementing safety plans;
13 4. For reasonable attorney’s fees as provided for by statute;
14 5. For costs of suit herein incurred; and
15 6. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
16

17 DATED: March 12, 2024 LAW OFFICES OF HIRJI & CHAU, LLP
18
__________________________________
19
Rosa K. Hirji
20 Robert D. Skeels
Attorneys for Plaintiff, by and through his
21 Guardian ad Litem Fernando Luna

20
COMP

Case Info

Judge

Joseph M. Lipner Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

March 12, 2024

Case Filing Date

March 12, 2024

County

Parties

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.