Current Conditions
42°F - CLEAR
(556) (514) (400) (62) (48) (31) (29) (28) (25) (17) (10) (9) (6) (6) (5) (5) (4) (4)
U.S. District Court Judge R. Barclay Surrick Friday dismissed three allegations against the district by Rose Sampson, a former assistant superintendent who was fired in June 2005 and sued the district six months later.
The ruling also removes three former SDL administrators from the suit.
Sampson alleged she had been subject to a racially hostile work environment and was fired in retaliation for filing a discrimination complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Sampson also alleged she had been defamed by the former district officials and was subject to an illegal search of her office that violated her due process rights.
She sued the school district and former superintendent Rita Bishop, former chief financial officer Curt Baker and former federal compliance coordinator Robert Bourdeaux, seeking $1 million in damages.
The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment in April, asking the judge to dismiss the allegations and remove Bishop, Baker and Bourdeaux from the lawsuit.
Surrick removed the former employees and dismissed all but one of the allegations.
He also ruled that Sampson could not seek punitive damages against the school district.
But Surrick upheld Sampson's allegation that her firing was a form of racial discrimination by retaliation.
A trial is scheduled to begin June 29 in federal court in Philadelphia.
"Mrs. Sampson looks forward to her day in court," said Gregory Heller, an attorney representing Sampson.
Heller declined to comment on Surrick's ruling.
Bishop and Baker, who now work for Roanoke (Va.) City Public Schools, also declined comment.
"I look forward to a total resolution," said Bishop, Roanoke superintendent. Baker is deputy superintendent for operations.
Sampson, the principal of Ben Franklin School in Harrisburg, could not immediately be reached for comment; nor could Kelly Burkholder, spokeswoman for SDL.
Sampson began working for the Lancaster district as assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction in July 2003.
In January 2004, the state Auditor General began investigating SDL for alleged mismanagement of funds, prompting the resignation of former superintendent Ricardo Curry, who eventually went to prison for mail fraud.
In December 2004, the district hired an outside auditing firm to conduct its own review of financial records.
As part of the audit, Bishop — who had replaced Curry — Baker, Bourdeaux and auditors entered the Office of Teaching and Learning after school hours on Jan. 4, 2005, to gather data from computers when no employees were there.
Sampson, who supervised the OTL staff and worked in the office, learned of the unannounced visit when Bishop inadvertently tripped the building's alarm and a security company notified her of the "intruders."
Sampson complained to a school board member the following day that the office visit "represented the culminating event in a series of incidents that has created what I believe to be an unreceptive work environment," according to court documents.
In her lawsuit, she alleged that district officials subjected her to an unreasonable search and seizure, a protection under the Fourth Amendment, and deprived her of due process, a right under the 14th Amendment, because the entry into her office was reported in the newspaper.
She also accused Bishop of "acting with malice" when she released a report stemming from records found during the late-night search, according to court documents.
In March 2005, Sampson filed a discrimination charge with the EEOC, alleging race and gender discrimination and a hostile work environment.
On June 1, 2005, she participated in an EEOC mediation with district officials to try to resolve the allegations.
Less than three weeks later, on June 21, 2005, the SDL board voted to terminate her "without cause."
In its request for summary judgment, attorneys for the district argued that Sampson failed to produce sufficient evidence of "severe or pervasive" discriminatory actions against her by SDL officials.
Sampson recalled hearing only two comments she found offensive and failed to tell Bishop about them, according to court documents.
Attorneys also argued that officials had a right to enter the office after hours and retrieve data, which was not a violation of Sampson's rights.
They also argued that Baker and Bourdeaux did not make any defamatory statements against Sampson and that Bishop has immunity as a "high public official" because she was executing her responsibilities as superintendent.
Surrick agreed with those arguments, but he upheld Sampson's claim that her firing was in retaliation for pursuing the discrimination case against the district.
SDL's attorneys argued that Sampson was fired because of "a breakdown in the working relationship" with Bishop that predated Sampson's filing of the EEOC complaint.
The judge based his decision on the timing of the firing and a court deposition by former school board member Pat Dixon, who said the EEOC action played a role in the board's vote to fire Sampson.
Dixon was the only board member to vote against Sampson's firing.
E-mail: bwallace@lnpnews.com
