eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
 2021-07

Mendoza v. Round Rock Indep Sch Dist ( 2021 )


Menu:
 
  • Case: 20-50875     Document: 00515959537         Page: 1     Date Filed: 07/30/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
July 30, 2021
No. 20-50875                           Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Ivette Mendoza, Parent of C.O., a minor child; David Ortega,
Parent of C.O., a minor child; C.O-M., by next friend Ivette Mendoza
and David Ortega,
Plaintiffs—Appellants,
versus
Round Rock Independent School District; YMCA of
Greater Williamson County,
Defendants—Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 1:19-CV-860
Before King, Dennis, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Plaintiffs fail to allege plausibly that the Round Rock Independent
School District (“RRISD”) is liable for harm to their minor child under the
standard for municipal liability set forth in Monell v. Department of Social
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 20-50875        Document: 00515959537           Page: 2    Date Filed: 07/30/2021
No. 20-50875
Services of City of New York,
    436 U.S. 658
    , 694 (1978). “Municipal liability
under
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     requires proof of 1) a policymaker; 2) an official
policy; [and] 3) . . . a violation of constitutional rights whose ‘moving force’
is the policy or custom.” Rivera v. Hous. Indep. Sch. Dist.,
    349 F.3d 244
    , 247
(5th Cir. 2003) (quoting Piotrowski v. City of Hous.,
    237 F.3d 567
    , 578 (5th Cir.
2001).     Under Texas law, the local school board is the “municipal
policymaking authority” for purposes of Monell liability. Id. at 248.
Plaintiffs’ allegation that, on a single instance, a substitute school bus
driver dropped off their child at a bus stop without a guardian present is
insufficient to give rise to a plausible claim that the RRISD School Board had
an official policy of violating students’ rights to bodily integrity by leaving
them unsupervised in public areas.
Accordingly, the district court properly dismissed this suit for failure
to state a claim. We affirm.
2