return
to Articles section
PLANS Complaint against Twin Ridges School District
February 10, 1998
McKINLEY & SMITH
By: Evan Eickmeyer
* * * * *
SCOTT M. KENDALL, Bar No. 166156
McKINLEY & SMITH
A Professional Corporation
3435 American River Dr., Suite B
Sacramento, CA 95864
Telephone: (916) 972-1333
Facsimile: (916) 972-1335
Attorneys for plaintiff PLANS, INC.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
PLANS, Inc.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
SACRAMENTO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, TWIN RIDGES ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL DISTRICT, DOES 1 - 100,
Defendants.
CASE NO.
COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
[U.S. Const., amends. I, XIV; 42 U.S.C. ß 1983; Cal. Const., art. XVI,
ß 5 and art. IX, ß 8]
Dept:
Plaintiff alleges:
1. This action arises under the First and Fourteenth Amendments
to the Constitution of the United States; and U.S.C. Title 42, ß 1983.
2. Plaintiff PLANS, Inc. (People for Legal and Non-Sectarian
Schools, hereinafter "PLANS") is a non-profit California Corporation
organized for the purpose, among other things, of educating the public
regarding Waldorf education. Members of PLANS include taxpayers
that reside in the Sacramento City Unified School District and the Twin
Ridges Elementary School District.
3. Defendant Sacramento City Unified School District
(hereinafter "Sacramento City") is, and at all times herein mentioned
was, a school district duly organized and existing under the laws of
the State of California.
4. Defendant Twin Ridges Elementary School District (hereinafter
"Twin Ridges") is, and at all times herein mentioned was, a school
district duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of
California.
5. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of
defendants sued herein as Does 1-100, inclusive, and therefore sues
these defendants by these fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this
complaint to allege their true names and capacities when ascertained.
Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the
fictitiously named defendants is responsible in some manner for the
occurrences herein alleged, and that plaintiff's injuries as herein
alleged were proximately caused by the wrongful conduct of these
fictitiously named defendants.
6. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that
at all times herein mentioned, Does 1-100 were the agents, servants,
and employees of their codefendants and in doing the things hereinafter
alleged were acting within the course and scope of their authority as
agents, servants, and employees with the permission and consent of
their codefendants.
7. Plaintiff is informed and believes that defendants Sacramento
City and Twin Ridges operate taxpayer funded Waldorf schools at various
locations within their districts and/or under their authority.
8. Plaintiff is informed and believes that a primary purpose and
primary effect of said operation of Waldorf schools is to advance
religion, including the religious doctrines of Anthroposophy.
9. Members of PLANS are injured, as taxpayers, by such
establishment of religion in violation of the First and Fourteenth
Amendments of the United States Constitution, and Article XVI, ß 5 and
Article IX, ß 8 of the California Constitution.
10. Plaintiff is informed and believes that defendants Sacramento
City and Twin Ridges intend to continue to operate Waldorf schools
within their districts and/or under their authority.
11. Unless and until enjoined by this court, defendants
Sacramento City and Twin Ridges will continue to operate Waldorf
schools, thereby causing great and irreparable injury in that such
continuing conduct violates the right of PLANS members to be free from
establishing religion through taxpayer funding in violation of the
First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, and
Article XVI, ß 5 and Article IX, ß 8 of the California Constitution.
12. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law for the injuries
suffered, and to be suffered in the future, in that it is impossible to
calculate a sum of money that will compensate plaintiff and its members
for the continuing violation of federal and state constitutional rights
under color of law.
13. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between
plaintiff and defendants concerning their respective duties in that
plaintiff contends that defendants are operating taxpayer funded
Waldorf schools within their respective districts and/or authority in
violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States
Constitution, and Article XVI, ß 5 and Article IX, ß 8 of the
California Constitution.
14. Plaintiff desires a judicial determination and declaration as
to whether defendants' operation of taxpayer funded Waldorf schools
within their respective districts and/or authority violates the First
and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, and
Article XVI, ß 5 and Article IX, ß 8 of the California Constitution.
15. A judicial declaration is necessary and appropriate at this
time under the circumstances in order that plaintiff and defendants may
ascertain their respective rights regarding the continuation of
taxpayer funded Waldorf schools.
16. By reason of defendants' acts and conduct as herein alleged,
plaintiff, and its members, were deprived of their rights, privileges,
and immunities secured for them by the First Amendment of the
Constitution of the United States, all in violation of Title 42 of the
United States Code, Section 1983.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays judgment against defendants, and each
of them as follows:
1. For a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining
defendants from operating
taxpayer funded Waldorf schools, or other schools that similarly
violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States
Constitution, and Article XVI, ß 5 and Article IX, ß 8 of the
California Constitution.
2. For a judicial declaration that the defendants' operation of
Waldorf schools violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the
United States Constitution, and Article XVI, ß 5 and Article IX, ß 8 of
the California Constitution.
3. For costs of suit herein incurred;
4. For reasonable attorneys' fees as authorized by Title 42
United States Code, Section 1988; and
5. For such other and further relief as the court deems proper.
Dated: February 10, 1998 McKINLEY & SMITH
A Professional Corporation
By:__________________________________
SCOTT M. KENDALL,
Attorney for PLANS, Inc.
return
to Articles section