Public entities seek dismissal in 'Grace Smith' lawsuit
Sheridan County School District No. 2 argues the lawsuit constitutes little more than a 'verbose diatribe.' Sheridan Police, Laramie County Schools, and the Department of Health also filed to dismiss.
Several public entities across Wyoming have filed motions for dismissal in a conspiratorial lawsuit that took aim at their handling of the COVID-19 public health emergency.
Those entities include school districts, a police department and the Wyoming Department of Health — representing just a few of the respondents named by the lawsuit.
The suit itself was rife with typographical errors, made repeated references to scientific and medical misinformation, and alleged that Gov. Mark Gordon and others were exaggerating the threat posed by COVID-19 as part of a plan to institute more “communist” and “totalitarian” control over the state.
The suit was brought by former Laramie High School student Grace Smith, her father and nine other parents across Wyoming who objected to their school districts’ mask policies. It named six school districts, various school boards and superintendents, and public health officers throughout Wyoming as respondents.
Now, many of those respondents are moving to have the suit against them dismissed, arguing that the lawsuit violates numerous rules of civil procedure.
‘The type of verbose diatribe that federal courts regularly condemn’
Sheridan County School District No. 2 was the first entity to file a motion to dismiss.
The school district’s motion argues that the lawsuit violates federal rules for civil procedure by failing to be clear or direct in its aims. The motion cites as supporting evidence several other federal cases dismissed for being “rambling,” “disorganized,” or “needlessly long (and) highly repetitious.”
“Petitioners’ 128-page Complaint blatantly fails to comply with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,” the motion states. “Instead, it is the type of verbose diatribe that federal courts regularly condemn. The Complaint is in no sense a ‘short and plain statement of the claim’ required by Rule 8(a)(2). The allegations are not stated in simple, concise, and direct terms as required by Rule 8(d)(1), but rather are lengthy and argumentative, and include many references to extrinsic materials that Petitioners believe support their theories concerning Covid-19.”
The Laramie Reporter previously dug into the lawsuit, highlighting its rampant spelling and grammar mistakes, scientific misinformation and unfounded conspiracy theories. The motion to dismiss condemns the petitioners’ attorney, Nick Beduhn, for bringing such a suit.
“The Petitioners are represented by legal counsel who has chosen to sacrifice compliance with Rule 8 in exchange for the publicity that he and his clients believe their lawsuit will garner,” the motion states. “Federal courts should not allow pleadings that are written in complete disregard of basic pleading rules simply because the proponent wants to obtain media attention.”
The motion further argues that such a meandering document would put an undue burden on the school district’s legal counsel, who would have to answer “pages and pages of legal argument, extrinsic facts, and alleged facts that have nothing to do with any transaction or occurrence involving SCSD2.”
The motion alleges that the lawsuit fails to distinguish what claims are being brought against whom, even though some claims for relief could only be answered by, for example, the governor.
“(T)he Complaint makes no distinction among the respondents charged even though it is obvious all of the respondents could not have participated in every act complained of by Petitioners,” the Sheridan County Schools motion states. “Further, it is not possible for any one respondent to identify which claims are being brought against it. It appears that all respondents are charged in each count and claim for relief.”
The motion filed by Laramie County School District No. 1 reiterates this argument.
‘A serious jurisdictional infirmity’
Sheridan County School District No. 2’s motion to dismiss also argues that the lawsuit itself does not belong in federal court. The motion alleges the lawsuit is concerned with perceived violations of state law rather than federal law.
“Petitioners do not assert a claim for relief pertaining to any specific provision of the United States Constitution or to any federal statute that would provide a basis for federal question jurisdiction,” the motion states. “Rather, the entire focus of the Complaint pertains to Petitioners’ claims that the Respondents’ actions during the Covid-19 pandemic were contrary to Wyoming law.”
The original lawsuit makes reference to several Wyoming state statutes and to the actions of Gov. Mark Gordon specifically.
The lawsuit also makes reference to a federal law, but the motion to dismiss argues that such a reference does not mean the suit falls under federal jurisdiction. The motion cites a number of other cases thrown out for failing to prove federal jurisdiction despite references to federal law.
“It is particularly telling that Petitioners do not identify any specific provision of the United States Constitution in their claims for relief,” the motion states. “Petitioners cannot create federal question jurisdiction over their state law claims simply by making a reference to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the United States Constitution at the beginning of their complaint and by making passing references to ‘unconstitutional.’”
The attorney for Laramie County School District No. 1 put it even more plainly.
“Petitioners’ Complaint suffers from, among other things, a serious jurisdictional infirmity,” their motion reads.
A similar argument was put forward by Chief Deputy Attorney General Ryan Schelhaas, who is representing the Wyoming Department of Health, Department of Health Interim Director Stefan Johansson and State Health Officer Alexia Harrist.
“Although the amended complaint references federal law, it does not identify any specific provision of the United States Constitution or any federal statute that would provide the basis for the Court to have jurisdiction,” states Schelhaas’ memorandum supporting dismissal. “Rather, petitioners only complain about actions taken by the respondents under State law.”
The memorandum argues this lack of jurisdiction is grounds for dismissal.
“Petitioners are asking for declaratory relief under a façade of 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202, motivated by what they view as injustices with how respondents have handled the COVID-19 pandemic, couched in grievances that pertain only to State law,” the memorandum alleges. “It is the petitioners’ burden, not the Court’s, to state their theories to invoke the legal authority to hear the case … Where a party fails to lead, a court has no duty to follow.”
So far, those that have moved for dismissal include: the Sheridan County School District No. 2 Board of Trustees and Superintendent, the Laramie County School District No. 1 Board of Trustees and Superintendent, the Sheridan Police Department, the Wyoming Department of Health and its interim director, and Wyoming State Health Officer Alexia Harrist.
The court has yet to grant dismissal for any entity or individual.