## Facts

- Andrew Yara was a student at Perryton High School in the Perryton Independent School District.
- Andrew’s world-history teacher ran an annual classroom activity meant to teach students about persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany.
- The teacher split the class into two groups: one group had to wear red ribbons, and the other group was told to discriminate against the ribbon wearers; teachers and staff members participated.
- Andrew wore a red ribbon during the third year the activity was held.
- During the activity, a staff member instructed the red-ribbon students to kneel and face a wall.
- Andrew’s cousin, acting as part of the persecuting group, ordered Andrew to carry him to class.
- Another student jumped on the cousin’s back; the students fell, and Andrew was injured.
- Although injured, Andrew continued to follow orders and carried his cousin and two other students to their classes.
- Andrew later received medical treatment for physical pain and depression that his family linked to the activity.
- No student had been hurt during the activity in prior years.
- Andrew and his parents sued the District under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of Andrew’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable seizures and excessive force and his Fourteenth Amendment substantive due-process right to bodily integrity.
- The district court granted summary judgment to the District, concluding there was no evidence tying the alleged constitutional harm to an official policy or custom adopted by the school board (the District’s policymaker), and no showing of deliberate indifference for failure to train or supervise.
- The Yaras appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the Yaras raised a genuine dispute of material fact that an official policy or custom attributable to the District’s final policymaker caused the alleged Fourth or Fourteenth Amendment violations.
2. Whether the Yaras produced evidence that the District was deliberately indifferent—through inadequate training or supervision—in a way that caused the alleged constitutional injury.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the grant of summary judgment for Perryton Independent School District.
- The court held the Yaras did not produce evidence that the school board adopted, authorized, or otherwise made the classroom activity a District policy or custom for purposes of municipal liability under § 1983.
- The court also held the Yaras did not show deliberate indifference supporting a failure-to-train or failure-to-supervise theory, emphasizing the absence of prior injuries from the activity.
- Because municipal-liability elements were not met, the court did not need to decide whether the classroom conduct itself amounted to an underlying constitutional violation.

## Legal Principles

- A school district is not liable under § 1983 based only on an employee’s acts; a plaintiff must satisfy Monell by showing an official policy or custom that caused the constitutional injury.
- Identifying the “final policymaker” is a question of state law; for Texas school districts, the school board is generally the final policymaker for district operations.
- A policy can be shown by an official decision by the policymaker, or by a widespread and persistent practice that is so common it can be treated as the district’s custom.
- Failure-to-train or failure-to-supervise liability requires proof that the district acted with deliberate indifference, usually shown through a pattern of similar violations or an obvious and highly predictable risk of constitutional harm.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment because the Yaras failed to connect Andrew’s injuries from the classroom persecution exercise to an official policy or custom made by the District’s school board, and they also failed to show the District was deliberately indifferent in training or supervising staff in a way that caused the alleged Fourth or Fourteenth Amendment violations.


Yara v. Perryton Independent School District, 560 F. App'x 356 (2014)