Matthew Hilton (#A3655)
MATTHEW HILTON, P.C.
Attorney for Plaintiffs
P.O. Box 781
Springville, UT 84663
Telephone: (801) 489-1111
Telephone: (801) 489-6000
FIRST AMENDED COPY
IN THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR UTAH COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH
Judge Steven L. Hansen
JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
CITIZENS OF NEBO SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR MORAL AND LEGAL VALUES, a Utah non-profit corporation; WILLIAM MILLER; DONNA STEVENS, for herself, as next best friend of JOSHUA A. LEE; KARL BLUNCK, KAREN BLUNCK; KACEY BLUNCK; RON HAMMOND; ALISA HAMMOND, Plaintiffs,
Civil No. 970400973 vs.
UTAH STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION; CRAIG JACKSON, DIRECTOR OF DIVISION OF OCCUPA- TIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING; WENDY WEAVER, Defendants.
COME NOW Plaintiffs by and through their counsel of record, and complain of the Defendants through this Amended Complaint and Affidavits on file with the Court and incorporated by this reference) as follows:
I. PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. Plaintiff Citizens of Nebo School District for Moral and Legal Values is a Utah non-profit corporation whose purpose is to promote in the Nebo School District (1) teaching by District employees and volunteers through precept and example the traditional moral and legal values and (2) parental involvement in the education and moral upbringing of children enrolled in the District. All officers and members of the corporation: reside within the boundaries of the Nebo School District; have children in public schools in Nebo School District; and pay taxes (either property taxes or state income taxes) that affect the funding of schools in Nebo School District.
2. Individual plaintiff William Miller is a resident within the Nabo School District, pays local and state taxes that support the District, and has four grandchildren attending Nebo School District.
3. Individual plaintiff Donna Stevens is a resident within the Nebo District, pays local and state taxes that support the District, and has one grandson at Spanish Fork High School and a granddaughter and Spanish Fork Junior High School that will attend Spanish Fork High School during the upcoming academic year. Donna Stevens is the next best friend of Joshua A. Lea who is seventeen and is a senior at Spanish Fork High School and a current student in Defendant Weaver’s Advanced Placement Psychology Class.
4. Individual Plaintiffs Karl Blunck and Karen Blunck have a son, Kacey Blunck, who is a Senior at Spanish Fork High School and is eighteen years old. At the time of the conduct complained of, Plaintiff Kacey Blunck was seventeen years old. Plaintiffs Karl and Karen Blunck have two other children enrolled at Spanish Fork High School. Karl, Karen, and Kacey Blunck are Plaintiffs in their own right.
5. Individual plaintiffs Ron and Alisa Hammond are residents of the Nebo School District, pay local and state taxes that support the District, and have four children enrolled in the Nebo School District at schools other than Spanish Fork High School.
6. Defendant Utah State Board of Education is constitutionally and statutorily charged with general control and supervision of the state’s public education system and fulfilling its statutory mandate to teach morality, obedience to law, respect for parents, and related matters in connection with regular school work. Defendant state Board of Education is also charged with taking appropriate action against any teaching certificate holder who has "exhibited behavior evidencing unfitness for duty through immoral, unprofessional, or incompetent conduct, or [is found] to have committed any other violation of standards of ethical conduct, performance, or professional competence."
7. Defendant Craig Jackson is the Director of Occupational and Professional Licensing for the State of Utah and is statutorily charged with ensuring that all licensing laws are complied with in the State of Utah.
8. Defendant Wendy Weaver has been and is currently a teacher employed by the Nebo School District, and in that capacity, is statutorily charged not only to "cooperate and share responsibility in carrying out the purposes of legislatively mandated curriculum and societal values including the teaching of morality, obedience to law, and respect for parents". In addition, "because school employees . . .serve as examples to their students," Defendant Weaver ".may not support or encourage criminal conduct by students, teachers, or volunteers."
9. Article I § 11 and Article VIII § 5 of the Utah Constitution confer jurisdiction on this court to hear the Plaintiffs’ request for declaratory relief against the Defendants. The statutory provisions of the Declaratory Judgment Act which is expressly declared to be remedial in nature and is required to be "liberally construed to effectuate that remedial purpose," also confers jurisdiction on this court to hear Plaintiffs’ complaint.
II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Teaching and Coaching History
10. In 1979 Defendant Weaver was certified by the State of Utah as a physical education teacher, and was hired by Nebo School District to work at Spanish Fork High School teaching physical education and coaching the girls volleyball team. In 1982 she received tenure as a faculty member at Spanish Fork High School where in 1988 she also began teaching psychology. In June 1997 she was relieved of her position as girls volleyball coach. At present she continues to teach psychology and does not teach physical education.
Activities as Volleyball Coach
11. While acting as a volleyball coach, Defendant Weaver led and participated with her team members in at least the following activities, all for the stated purpose of promoting "team unity": trips to a private cabin; four-day "survival" camping trips, weekend overnight sleep overs and hot tub parties at her house; all-night hot tub parties at the high school. During these activities the following occurred:
(A) On one occasion while the team members were playing football outside the cabin, Defendant Weaver was in the huddle of one team when someone told all the team members in the huddle that on signal they were to remove their shirts (which would result in no outer clothing over their bras), All of the players did so except one, whom Defendant Weaver and others then teased about the incident for the rest of the season, On another occasion while the team members were playing (tackle-touch) football outside the cabin, all of the players were told to take off their shirts and play in their bras and shorts. The coaches removed their shirts and played as well.
(B) When Defendant Weaver arranged for the volleyball-a-thon, she ordered a hot tub on wheels in which she would sit with certain girls.
(C) When the team went to Flaming Gorge, there was limited space to sleep in the accommodations chosen by the coaches. Everyone was sleeping close together in sleeping bags with Defendant Weaver in the middle.
(D) During weekend all-night team parties at Defendant Weaver’s home:
(I) Defendant Weaver made players face team members one on one and allow team members to state likes and dislikes about the person facing them. When one player was called on to face Defendant Weaver, a player who had felt she had been treated differently because she was "straight," she was told by Defendant. Weaver that Defendant Weaver hated her and the player was not wanted on the team;
(ii) Defendant Weaver directed team members to sit in a circle, select a partner, and wash the partner’s feet while the partner read verses of the Bible;
(iii) Defendant Weaver occasionally, without explanation, left the rest of the group and took an individual team member into a private room for an extended period of time;
(iv) Defendant Weaver was observed sitting on a couch, in-between two players, all under a blanket with the television playing.
(v) Defendant Weaver was present when team members made open displays of affection as they caressed each other, placed their heads in each other’s laps, and stroked each other’s faces and hair, and sometimes playfully struck each other’s breasts. Both those who were openly demonstrative in their affection and those who were more reserved would leave the group in pairs and return some time later.
(vi) Defendant Weaver penalized the playing time of those who did not attend the team "parties."
12. While acting as a volleyball coach, Defendant Weaver was adamantly against any of her team members becoming romantically involved with young man and did at least the following:
(A) Defendant Weaver became irate on the occasions when she saw a team player hugging a young man or dancing close to a young man;
(B) Defendant Weaver notified at least four team players that because they had boyfriends they could not play on the team, but would be only practice players;
(C) Defendant Weaver slammed a team member into a locker after a loss, telling the player that she had better go home because she had a boy friend and was "fooling around," and because of that conduct they were losing. This action by Defendant Weaver and repeated harassment during practices caused the team member significant emotional distress.
(D) Defendant Weaver would examine young women by lowering their shirts and raising their hair to determine who had a "hickey” (a physical symbol of involvement with a young man), and not allow those team members with one to play until it was gone;
(E) Defendant Weaver openly demeaned in front of team members any other young woman who appeared to be feminine. She put down girls who curled their hair, wore make-up, or had boyfriends.
(F) Defendant Weaver planned some of the volleyball team activities to conflict with some of the all-school activities involving both boys and girls, and then required team members to attend the volleyball team activity and thereby miss the boy-girl activity sponsored by the school.
(G) When Defendant Weaver discovered that team members were dating young men, she told the team members to break off the relationships.
(H) Defendant Weaver openly encouraged older players to form a network with younger, intimidated players, and seek to become extremely close to the exclusion of other activities, including dating. The older players would pick up the young players in vehicles or motorcycles and go places. When riding in vehicles, the players would sit close together rather than close to the doors, The pressure to participate in the network was very strong, especially since the older girls were generally the starting players. Many of those who were involved in the younger girl-older girl network later announced that they were lesbians,
(I) During the summers, some team members were seen at Defendant Weaver’s home on a very frequent basis and would stay for extended periods of time.
(J) Defendant Weaver benched one starter upon discovering that she had been steadily dating a young man; Defendant Weaver similarly demoted other players for their social involvement with young men.
Activities as a Psychology Teacher
13. While acting as a psychology teacher, Defendant Weaver did at least the following:
(A) Defendant Weaver administered a psychological personality test to Plaintiff students in class without disclosure or approval of the parents, which tests included a predictive component regarding student attitudes regarding family and sexual matters, and discussed the significance of the responses with students in class.
(B) Defendant Weaver administered the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) to her students and scored the same with students in class, assisting them in their interpretation of the test.
(C) Defendant Weaver had students keep journal accounts of their dreams, had students report the content of their dreams in class, and, after additional probing questions regarding the students’ personal lives, interpreted the dreams, or assign students to work in groups of three to discuss and interpret dreams.
(D) During class time, speaking to the entire class, Defendant Weaver demeaned the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, stating, among other things, that said church’s missionary farewells have no purpose. She also repeatedly discussed her religious beliefs -- or lack thereof -- in class. Among other things, and subject to further discovery,:
(I) During class, without spontaneous inquiry by a student, Defendant Weaver indicated that while her husband Gary Weaver read the Book of Mormon with the children in the home, she tried to get them to read books other then the Book of Mormon.
(ii) In class during class time, Defendant Weaver indicated to the class that she thought she had been a man in a previous life.
(iii) In class, during class time, Defendant Weaver discussed her excommunication from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, criticized the same church, and allowed students to do the same.
(E) Defendant Weaver influenced the students in the class by saying it is a good thing to question things and lifestyles to find out what you really want in your own personal life in terms of sexual orientation. She said in effect that the students should search it for themselves whether or not it is bad, or that they should question it themselves whether it was right or wrong, regardless of what others such as parents or the District would say, She asked her students to consider whether or not they should be homosexual.
(F) Defendant Weaver pressured one student (whom she had known outside of class) to state his personal perspective on her litigation with the District and her homosexual lifestyle after (1) she had led the class in a discussion regarding why she had filed the litigation, encouraged students to question life styles, and demeaned the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and (2) the student, whose religious and moral views were different than those of Defendant Weaver and vocal class members, had chosen to be silent.
14. During all of the foregoing, Defendant Weaver had access to volleyball team players, students, and school facilities because of her governmental position as teacher and coach at Spanish Fork High School.
Defendant Weaver’s Divorce, Cohabitation with Another Woman, and Lawsuit Against School District
15. On April 22 of 1997, Defendant Weaver began cohabitating with Rachael Smith, living in a committed, marital like relationship.
16. On May 19, 1997, Defendant Weaver was divorced from her husband Gary M. Weaver.
17. In October of 1997, Defendant Weaver directed her counsel to file litigation in federal court entitled Wendy Weaver v. Nebo School District, et. al. United States District Court, Civil No. 97CV0081 9 that challenges, under federal law, the right of the District and its administrators to restrict her speech with adults in the community, parents of students, and students regarding her choice of homosexual conduct and that her public homosexual lifestyle is an inappropriate basis to distinguish between her and other teachers that do not discuss or exhibit that conduct in public.
18. After the filing of the litigation in federal court, the Nebo School District sent clarifying correspondence to Defendant Weaver regarding the prohibitions regarding speech.
19. Plaintiffs filed an original complaint with various affidavits on December 23, 1997. A First Amended Complaint was filed on February 17, 1998.
DECLARATION OF WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION OF THE UTAH FAMILY EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS AND PRIVACY ACT
20. Paragraphs 1-19 are incorporated herein by this reference.
21. As a teacher certified in Utah and employed by the Nebo School District, under the Utah Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act Defendant Weaver has a statutory duty to "protect the privacy of students, their parents, and their families, and support parental involvement in the education of their children."
22. To protect that privacy, said Act prohibits "within the curriculum," the administration to any student of any psychological or psychiatric examination, test, or treatment, or any evaluation without the prior written consent of the student’s parent or legal guardian, in which the purpose or evident intended effect is to cause the student to reveal information, whether the information is personally identifiable or not, concerning the student’s or any family member’s: ... (c)sexual behavior, orientation, or attitudes; .[or]. . (e) critical appraisals of individuals with whom the student or family member has close family relationships[.]"
23. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory order determining whether or not the actions of Defendant Weaver in administering personality tests to Plaintiff Kacey Blunck and other students in her psychology class prior to disclosing the same to parents and obtaining their written permission to do the same, violated the provisions of this Act.
24. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory order determining whether or not the actions of Defendant Weaver in requiring the disclosure of personal dreams and interpreting the same in psychology class without prior disclosure to the parents and without their written permission, violated the provisions of said Act.
25. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory order determining whether or not the actions of Defendant Weaver pressuring Plaintiff Lee to disclose his familial, religious and sexual
DECLARATION OF WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION OF THE PSYCHOLOGIST LICENSING ACT
26. Paragraphs 1-25 are incorporated herein by this reference.
27. The Psychologist Licensing Act states that "psychological testing and the evaluation or assessment of personal characteristics such as intelligence, personality, abilities, interests, attitudes, and neuropsychological functioning" constitutes "the practice of psychology."
28. Said Act further states that psychoanalysis and psychotherapy also constitute the practice of psychology.
29. At no time has Defendant Weaver been licensed to practice psychology or been certified as a school psychologist, nor is Defendant Weaver entitled to exemption from licensure.
30. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory order determining whether or not the actions of Defendant Weaver in administering and interpreting personality tests to students, (including but not limited to the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), and scored the same and soliciting dreams from students and interpreting the same all constitute the practice of psychology under Utah law.
DECLARATION OF WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS PROTECTED BY THE UTAH CONSTITUTION
31. Paragraphs 1-30 are incorporated herein by this reference.
32. By statute and constitutional provision, Plaintiff Karen Blunck is entitled to have Defendant Weaver and the Utah State Board of Education ensure that state laws protecting parental rights and the public are enforced in the schools.
33. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory order determining whether or not actions in violation of the Utah Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act and the Psychologist Licensing Laws, deny parental rights of parents under the due process protections afforded by Article I § 7 of the Utah Constitution.
34. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory order determining whether or not actions in violation of the Utah Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act and the Psychologist Licensing Laws violate the natural, God-given, inherent and inalienable parental rights of Plaintiff Karen Blunck to direct the care and upbringing of her children, protected by Article I § 25 of the Utah Constitution.
35. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory order determining whether or not when parental autonomy and family privacy protected under state statutory law are infringed by a governmental actor or entity, a parent is entitled to at least $ 1.00 in nominal damages for violating the provisions of Article I §§ 7 and 25 of the Utah Constitution.
DECLARATION OF WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION OF THE RECOGNIZING CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOMS IN THE SCHOOLS ACT
36. Paragraphs 1-35 are incorporated herein by this reference.
37. Under the Utah Recognizing Constitutional Freedoms in the School Act, "[s]chool officials and employees may not use their positions to endorse, promote, or disparage a particular religious, denominational, sectarian, agnostic, or atheistic belief or viewpoint."
38. One of the regulations adopted under said Act by the State Board of Education states: An employee’s rights relating to voluntary religious practices and freedom of speech do not include proselytizing of any student regarding atheistic, agnostic, sectarian, religious, or denominational doctrine while the employee is acting in the employee’s official capacity, nor may an employee attempt to use his position to influence a student regarding the student’s religious beliefs or lack thereof.
39. One of the regulations adopted under said Act by the State Board of Education states: Even though acting in an official capacity, an employee may respond in an appropriate and restrained manner to a spontaneous question from a student regarding the employee’s personal belief or perspective, Nevertheless, because of the special position of trust held by school employees, employees should exercise great caution in expressing personal religious beliefs or perspectives, or opinions about the rightfulness or wrongfulness of any other person’s religious beliefs or lack thereof.
40. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory order determining whether or not that the conduct of Defendant Weaver at various times wherein she repeatedly expressed personal sentiments to students that denigrated the religious perspective of and membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and pressured Plaintiff Lee to express his religious and moral perspective in a hostile class environment when he did not want to speak regarding the same, violated the provisions and administrative rules of this Act.
DECLARATION OF WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION OF UTAH CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE I § 4, ARTICLE III §§ 1, 4
41. Paragraphs 1-40 are incorporated herein by this reference.
42. The State Board of Education relied upon authority granted under Article I § 4 and Article III §§ 1 and 4 of the Utah Constitution when it promulgated administrative rules to protect matters of conscience and define appropriate religious expression by government.
43. These constitutional provisions contain the following prohibitions an government action:
(A) "The rights of conscience shall never be infringed."
(B) "No public money shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or for the support of any ecclesiastical establishment."
(C) "First: -- Perfect toleration of religious sentiment is guaranteed."”
(D) "Fourth: - The Legislature shall make laws for the establishment and maintenance of a system of public schools, which shall be open to all the children of the State and be free from sectarian control."
44. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment that the conduct of Defendant Weaver outlined heretofore violated the provisions of Article I § 4 and Article III §§ 1, 4.
45. Plaintiff Lee seeks a declaratory order whether or not when freedom of religion or conscience are infringed by a governmental actor, the person who has been damaged is entitled to an amount of at least $ 1.00 in nominal damages from the governmental actor under each of Article 1, § 4 and Article 111, § 1 of the Utah Constitution.
DECLARATION OF WHETHER OR NOT THE CONDUCT OBSERVED BY AFFIANTS, IF COMMUNICATED TO OR OBSERVED BY AN EDUCATOR, MUST BE REPORTED PURSUANT TO U.C.A. § 53A-6-302 and U.C.A. § 62A-4a-403
46. Paragraphs 1-45 are incorporated herein by this reference.
47. There has been filed with the original complaint Affidavits from Kacey Blunck, Kristine Surningham, Marlo Chappel, Joshua A. Lee, Abbey Llewellyn, Molly Llewellyn, Stacey Mattison, and Michelle Morley. An Amended Affidavit of Marlo Chappal and an Affidavit from Denise Thomas was filed with the Amended Complaint,
48. Under the statutory child abuse or neglect reporting requirements, "child abuse or neglect" is assigned the meaning of "causing harm or threatened harm to a child’s health or welfare." "Harm or threatened harm” means damage or threatened damage to the physical or emotional health of and welfare of a child through neglect or abuse, and includes nonaccidental physical or mental injury, incest, sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, molestation, or repeated negligent treatment or maltreatment."
49. "[A]ny person" who "has reason to believe a child has been subjected to sexual exploitation, sexual abuse," or who observes a child "being subject to conditions or circumstances which would reasonably result in sexual abuse, physical abuse, or neglect," is required to "notify the nearest peace officer, law enforcement agency, or office of the division [of Child and Family Services)."
50. In 1994, the Utah Legislature imposed further requirements regarding the reporting of abuse between students and school employees.
(2) In addition to any duty to report cases of child abuse or neglect under Section 62A-4a-403, an educator who has reasonable cause to believe that a student may have been physically or sexually abused by a school employee shall immediately report the belief and all other relevant information to the school principal, superintendent, or to the office. (3) A school administrator who has received a report under Subsection (2) or who otherwise has reasonable cause to believe that a student may have been physically or sexually abused by an educator shall immediately report that information to the office [Certification of the State Office of Education].(4) Failure to comply with Subsection (2) or (3) shall be considered unprofessional conduct.
51. Plaintiffs seek a ruling from this court as to which of the following conditions either require or do not require a reporting requirement under both U.C.A. § 53A-6-302 and U.C.A. § 62A-4a-403:
A. As to the provider of the a//eged evidence:,
(I) alleged conduct that is reported by a student as a minor, former student as a minor, or former student as an adult to a school employee without further documented evidence;
(ii) alleged conduct that is reported by a parent of a student or former student to a school employee without further documented evidence;
(iii) alleged conduct that is reported by a counsel for a parent Of a student or former student to a school employee without further documented evidence;
(iv) alleged conduct that is reported by a child that is not a student and a minor without further documented evidence;
(v) alleged conduct that is reported by an adult that has not been a student or Parent of a student without further documented evidence;
(vi) alleged conduct that is reported by any of the foregoing sources of information ((I) - (v)) only when the only other evidence of conduct is hearsay;
(vii) alleged conduct that is reported by any of the foregoing sources of information ((I) - (v)) when hearsay and other admissible evidence is submitted,
(viii) alleged conduct that is reported by any of the foregoing sources of information ((I) - (v)) only when other supporting, admissible (non-hearsay) evidence is also submitted;
B. As to the time when the alleged content occurred:
(i) alleged conduct that occurred more than four years prior to the time it is reported to educators and the information was never disclosed to any law enforcement personnel or child protective services;
(ii) alleged conduct that occurred more than four years prior to the time it is reported to educators and the information was disclosed to any law enforcement personnel or child protective services;
(iii) alleged conduct that occurred less than four years prior to the time it is reported to educators;
(iv) alleged conduct that occurred less than three years prior to the time it is reported to educators;
(v) alleged conduct that occurred less than two years prior to the time it is reported to educators;
(vi) alleged conduct that occurred less than one year prior to the time it is reported to educators;
(vii) alleged conduct that occurred less then six months prior to the time it is reported to educators,
C. As to specific evidence illustrated by statements by students or former students:
(i) the information stated in the Affidavit of Kacey Blunck;
(ii) the information stated in the Affidavit of Kristine Burningham;
(iii) the information stated in the Amended Affidavit of Mario Chappel;
(iv) the information stated in the Affidavit of Joshua A. Lee;
(v) the information stated in the Affidavit of Abbey Llewellyn;
(vi) the information stated in the Affidavit of Molly Llewellyn;
(vii) the information stated in the Affidavit of Stacey Mattison;
(viii) the information stated in the Affidavit of Michelle Morley.
(ix) the information stated in the Affidavit of Linda Thomas.
(x) all of the information combined from the foregoing Affidavits.
52. Plaintiffs also seek a ruling from this court as that the requirements under U.C.A. § 53A-6-302 and U.C.A. § 62A-4a-403 also applies to matters observed or reported to non-certified volunteers that work in or assist the public schools, whether in the classroom, on school activities, or in after-school sports as a coach or assistant coach.
DECLARATION OF WHETHER THE CONDUCT OF DEFENDANT WEAVER VIOLATES MANDATORY TEACHING REQUIREMENTS
53. Paragraphs 1-52 are incorporated herein by this reference.
54. As a certified teacher in the State of Utah employed by the Nebo School District, Defendant Weaver, and all other statutorily certified teachers are statutorily expected to "serve as examples to their students," and while acting in her "official capacity" may "not support or encourage criminal conduct by students, teachers, or volunteers." It has been statutorily mandated that teachers share in the responsibility of carrying out the purposes of curriculum objectives mandated by the Legislature.
55. The Legislature has mandated that: Honesty, temperance, morality, courtesy, obedience to law, respect for and an understanding of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitutions of the United States and the state of Utah, Utah history including territorial and preterritorial development to the present, the essentials and benefits of the free enterprise system, respect for parents and home, the dignity and necessity of honest labor and other skills, habits, and qualities of character which will promote and upright and desirable citizenry and better prepare students for a richer, happier life shall be taught in connection with regular school work.
56. The Utah Legislature has also specifically found that public schools were not only to "encourage individual citizens to choose to live [the] fundamental values and attributes" outlined above, but that they are deemed necessary for the preservation of a free society, These values presuppose there are standards of conduct that underlie the maintenance of our free institutions. When presented in a context that presupposes freedom of conscience, parental autonomy and family privacy, the teaching, promotion, and internalization of values and attributes outlined in this statute by teachers, volunteers, and students will further strengthen and preserve our free government and institutions, including the family.
57. The Utah Legislature also followed Supreme Court precedent recognizing that "a teacher serves as a role model for his students, exerting a subtle but important influence over their perceptions and values."
58. By statute, practicing psychology without a license, or being entitled to exemption from licensure, is criminal conduct and constitutes a third degree felony.
59. By statute, an adult that acts with a minor in violation of state law, or encourages the same, contributes to the delinquency of minors and constitutes a class B misdemeanor.
60. By statute, marriages between persons of the same sex are prohibited and void in the State of Utah.
61. By statute, the practice of sodomy is criminal conduct.
62. By court decision, cohabitation contrary to the law of the State of Utah can demonstrate a lack of moral example or moral fitness.
63. Upon information and belief, while discussing matters with representatives of the media, Defendant Weaver acknowledged that she chose excommunication from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints because otherwise she would have been required to abandon her lesbian or homosexual conduct.
64. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory order determining whether or not the actions of Defendant Weaver as alleged herein and proven hereafter with additional discovery, constituted or constitutes official conduct that supported or supports, encouraged or encourages criminal conduct by teachers or students.
65. Plaintiffs seek a declaratory order determining whether or not the actions of Defendant Weaver as alleged herein and proven hereafter with additional discovery demonstrate her failure to fulfill her statutory duties to serve as an example to her students of morality, obedience to law, and respect for parents and other virtues that are required to be included in all teaching.
1. "The general control and supervision of the public education system shall be vested in the State Board of Education." Utah Constitution, Art. X § 3.
2. "The State Board of Education has general control and supervision of the state’s public education system. ”General control and supervision” as used in Article X, Sec. 3, of the Utah Constitution means directed to the whole system." U.C.A. § 53A-1-401(l).
3. "Honesty, temperance, morality, courtesy, obedience to law, respect for and an understanding of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitutions of the United States and the state of Utah, Utah history including territorial and preterritorial development to the present, the essentials and benefits of the free enterprise system, respect for parents and home, the dignity and necessity of honest labor and other skills, habits, and qualities of character which will promote and upright and desirable citizenry and better prepare students for a richer, happier life shall be taught in connection with regular school work." U.C.A. § 53A-13-101(4)
4. U.C.A. § 53A-6-301(a).
5. "The division shall administer and enforce all licensing laws of Title 58." U.C.A. § 58-1-103. "The director shall perform all duties, functions, and responsibilities assigned to the division by law or rule and, where provided, with the collaboration and assistance of the boards established under this title." U.C.A. § 58-1-104(2). "The duties, functions, and responsibilities of the division include the following: ... (4) taking administrative and judicial action against persons in violation of laws and rules administered and enforced by the division, including the issuance of cease and desist orders- (5) seeking injunctions and temporary restraining orders to restrain unauthorized activity". U.C.A. §§ 58-1-106(4) and (5).
6. U.C.A. § 53A-13-101 (7)(a).
7. U.C.A. § 53A-1 3-101 (4).
8. U.C.A. § 53A-1 3-101(5)(a).
9. "All courts shall be open, and every person, for an injury done to him in his person, property, and reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law, which shall be administered without denial or unnecessary delay; and no person shall be barred from prosecuting or defending before any tribunal in this State, by himself or counsel, any civil cause to which he is a party." Utah Constitution, Article I § 11.
10. The district court shall have original jurisdiction in all matters except as limited by this constitution or by statute, and power to issue all extraordinary writs." Utah Constitution, Article VIII, § 5.
11. U.C.A. § 78-33-12.
12. Verified Complaint of Wendy Weaver, Weaver v. Nebo School District, et. al., United States District Court for the District of Utah, Civil No. 97CV00819, ¶17.
13. Weaver v. Weaver, Fourth Judicial District Court, Case No. 97440031 DA.
14. U.C.A. § 53A-13-301(l).
15. U.C.A. § 53-A-13-302(2).
16. U.C.A. § 53A-13-302(1), attitudes in class without prior disclosure to the parents and without their written permission, violated the provisions of said Act.
17. U.C.A. §§ 58-61-101 et. seq.
18. U.C.A. § 58-62-102(9)(a)(iii).
19. U.C.A. § 58-62-102(9)(a)(iv).
20. See U.C.A. § 52A-6-101.
21. "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law." Utah Constitution, Article I § 7.
22. U.C.A. § 53A-13-101.1(4).
23. R 277-105-8 A, State Office of Education, "Expression of Personal Belief by Employees."
24. R 277-105-8 B, State Office of Education, "Expression of Personal Belief by Employees."
25. Utah Constitution, Article I § 4.
26. Utah Constitution, Article I § 4.
27. Utah Constitution, Article III § 1.
28. Utah Constitution, Article III § 4.
29. U.C.A. § 62A-4a-402 (3)
30. U.C.A. § 62A-4a-402(4).
31. U.C.A. § 62A-4a-403(1).
32. U.C.A. § 53A-6-302(2), (3) and (4).
33. U. C. A. § 53A- 1 3-1 01 (5).
34. U.C.A. § 53A-13-101(7).
35. U.C.A. § 53A-13-101(4).
36. Senate Journal, April 17, 1996, page 41 (footnotes omitted),
37. Senate Journal, April 17, 1996, page 41-42, citing Ambach v. Norwick, 441 U.S. 68, 78-79 (1979).
38. U.C.A. § 58-61-503.
39. U.C.A. §§ 76-3a-801, 802.
40. U.C.A. § 30-1-2
41. U.C.A. § 76-5-40 42 Tucker v. Tucker, 910 P.2d 1209, 1217-1218 (Utah 1996),
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek from this Court the following relief:
1. That declaratory judgments and orders be issued addressing the facts, parties, legal and equitable questions before this Court as outlined in this complaint;
2. That as needed for resolution of legal matters, a jury hear the factual questions;
3. That if declared to be appropriate as a matter of constitutional law, awards of nominal damages of $1.00 in favor of each Plaintiff seeking a ruling against any Defendant involved in conduct found to be violative of each and any provision of the Utah Constitution pled in this complaint;
4. That no costs or attorney fees be awarded any party to this proceedings DATED this 17th day of February, 1997.
MATTHEW HILTON, P.C.
Attorney for Plaintiffs