California Court Sustains $5 Million Verdict Against School District.
The California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District has sustained a $5 million verdict against the Coronado Unified School District.
The previous civil action lawsuit against the district was brought by a student identified as Jane Doe, who claimed that assistant basketball coach Jordan Bucklew sexually assaulted her when she was a minor.
Doe’s testimony included details about “significant emotional and psychological harm” she experienced as a result of the abuse. The jury concluded that the Coronado Unified School District failed to protect Doe and, in turn, awarded damages based on the multiple trauma-related conditions she now lives with. Jordan Bucklew later pleaded guilty to a criminal charge involving unlawful sexual contact with a minor.
However, the school district disputed the verdict, citing numerous procedural errors and mismanagement of evidence. Upon further review by the appellate court, the claim that the jury was biased towards certain pieces of evidence was dismissed – they had not even seen it.
The district also claimed that jury instructions favored the plaintiff, however, their proposed alternative was found to have been skewed heavily towards the defense and was characterized as “argumentative”.
Even the plaintiff’s expert testimonies were called into question: Doe’s hiring and supervision standards expert and psychologist were both scrutinized for perceived inaccuracies. Ultimately, the appellate panel found these claims to be unsubstantiated. The school district also argued that the requested compensation did not accurately reflect damages – the court highlighted Doe’s diagnosis of chronic post-traumatic stress disorder in its rebuttal.
While the appellate court firmly objected to the district’s challenges to the verdict, the panel agreed that an additional trial is necessary: this time, involving Doe’s parents. The court found evidence that may point to failure to intervene before Bucklew’s arrest, including knowledge of one-on-one “training sessions,” the disabling of Doe’s phone tracking capabilities, and late returns home.
The court argued that the recent increase in education and awareness about sexual abuse cases should mobilize parents along with schools and other institutions: “An ordinarily reasonable and prudent parent must also have an awareness of the risks and a responsibility to keep these risks in mind when undertaking their affirmative legal duty to protect their children,” the panel stated.
The ruling’s impact highlights the responsibility of school districts, youth organizations, and parents in preventing and responding to abuse. The case is now back in trial court, where a jury will examine the involvement of Doe’s parents.
Authors: Andy Goldwasser and Alexis Kabat
