A.W., a minor, through his parent and next friend, and Lee Wise v. Pine Bluff School District; Jennifer Barbaree, individually and in her official capacity as Superintendent; Timothy Scott, individually and in his official capacity as Principal of Broadmoor Elementary School; Andrea Wright, individually and in her official capacity as an employee of Broadmoor Elementary School; Monica Norful, individually and in her official capacity as an employee of Broadmoor Elementary School; Faseeia Preston, individually and in her official capacity as a State of Arkansas employee; and Arkansas Department of Health

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas grants the Pine Bluff defendants’ motion for summary judgment in an action arising from the administration of an unwanted flu vaccination to a minor student. The court rejects the plaintiffs’ substantive due process claims, concluding that the defendants’ conduct did not shock the conscience, and also rejects their Arkansas claims for outrage and negligence. The court directs the Clerk to terminate the Pine Bluff School District and four associated defendants from the case.

Holdings

1. The plaintiffs were not entitled to defer ruling on the summary-judgment motion because their supporting declaration did not identify specific facts sought through further discovery or explain how those facts were essential to opposing summary judgment.
2. The plaintiffs' substantive due process claims failed because no defendant's conduct was sufficiently shocking to the contemporary conscience, even assuming that A.W. had a liberty interest in refusing an unwanted flu shot and that Lee had a liberty interest in withholding consent on A.W.'s behalf.
3. Arkansas does not recognize a tort for negligent infliction of emotional distress, and the plaintiffs' outrage claim failed because the defendants' conduct was not beyond all possible bounds of decency.
4. The Pine Bluff defendants were entitled to summary judgment on the negligence claim because Arkansas Code section 21-9-301 provides immunity absent applicable insurance coverage, and the defendants submitted evidence that no such coverage existed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the plaintiffs were entitled under Rule 56(d) to defer consideration of the defendants' summary-judgment motion to conduct additional discovery.
2. Whether administering an unwanted flu shot to A.W. without parental consent violated the plaintiffs' substantive due process rights.
3. Whether the defendants' conduct supported an Arkansas claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress or outrage.
4. Whether the Pine Bluff defendants were immune from the plaintiffs' negligence claim under Arkansas law absent insurance coverage.

Disposition

other