Attorney to appeal lawsuit dismissal

Class action targets juvenile court judge Sandra Stabile Harwood

LIBERTY -- Attorney David Engler is planning to appeal a federal judge's decision to dismiss a class action lawsuit alleging that Trumbull County Family Court Administrative Judge Sandra Stabile Harwood failed to seek diversion for his 14-year-old client. He claims trauma from an alleged rape at Liberty Schools led to her committing two felonies this year.

The lawsuit was filed May 19 in the U.S. Northern Ohio District Court, alleging that Harwood violated the due process rights of his minor client by not seeking diversion outlined under Ohio Juvenile Rule 9(a) after the child was charged with two felonies.

The lawsuit relates to another filed by the father of the juvenile on Oct 1, 2022, alleging Title IX violations against Liberty Local Schools and two then-employees of the school claiming his daughter had been sexually assaulted and subsequently bullied by a male student at W.S. Guy Junior High School, with the father claiming his daughter received no support from the two then employees of the school.

In November, the district declined to answer questions on the matter, instead providing a previously used statement from 2022: "As the district has previously stated, we believe the evidence shows that statements contained within the lawsuit regarding Liberty Local Schools' investigation into the matter are not true.

"When our district was made aware of the sexual assault allegations, we immediately performed a thorough investigation in cooperation with the Liberty Township Police Department.

"We are confident that as this process moves through the courts, the district will have been found to have acted swiftly and appropriately in this case."

SUIT AGAINST HARWOOD

The class action lawsuit was dismissed by federal Judge John Adams. Engler contests in the initial complaint that "psychological harm" stemming from an alleged sexual assault and inaction over the years since had factored into his client's decision to steal a neighbor's car, causing damage to the vehicle during a joyride on May 26. The juvenile was charged with felony failure to comply and theft.

As a result, the attorney says his client sought diversion from the criminal justice system, a process justice advocates say should be used as a means to deter adolescent misbehavior and impulsive behavior from devolving into a life of being intertwined with the criminal justice system.

But the lawsuit claims when his client sought to be evaluated under Juvenile Rule 9(a), the judge declined using the informal process.

Under the Ohio Rules of Juvenile procedure, JR 9 (a), says court action is to be avoided for "appropriate cases" in favor of community resources that will be a betterment to the juvenile offender.

The attorney claims the Juvenile Court has a "blanket policy" not to apply the rule for all felony cases.

"The failure of the Trumbull County juvenile court to even consider alternative ways to deal with J.B.'s (juvenile client) particular situation caused J.B. to be incarcerated in the juvenile detention center, where she developed a severe eating disorder and other conditions that almost led to her death," legal counsel said.

Harwood contested this argument, filing a now-granted motion to dismiss Engler's and his client's claims that her procedural due process had been violated, court documents state.

The court maintained that Harwood and the court have acted in compliance with Ohio law and the rules of juvenile procedure. At the time, the motion had been pending a ruling by a federal judge, so the court declined further comment.

The federal judge in the suit against Harwood said the argument against the juvenile court judge "fell short" of the standards the judge said are required to "create a protected liberty interest."

Engler argued that Juvenile Rules 1 (b) and 9 (a) work in tandem to satisfy the claim of there being a due process violation against his client.

Adams wrote in the legal document, in part citing the Sixth Circuit court that said, "Even reading Rule 1 and Rule 9 in tandem, no particular substantive outcome is dictated by those rules."

The judge cited similar circumstances for his decision to dismiss the equal protection claim, saying the juvenile failed to "identify any protected legal interest."

In a letter written to an attorney working on behalf of Harwood, Engler said that while the court dismissed the case, the judge agreed in his conclusion with the, "underlying premise that a blanket rule banning diversion is not consistent with the Ohio Rules of Juvenile Procedure."

In the judge's opinion, he does say that "dismissal of this lawsuit should not be read as an endorsement of the policy allegedly adopted by the Trumbull County Juvenile Court."

The judge concluded, "Moreover, there can be little doubt that the exercise of discretion is of vital importance in Juvenile Court where the decision whether to proceed with formal court action can have life-changing impacts on young persons."

Engler cited this quote from Adams' opinion, stating that Adams was "clearly concerned" with the "potential adverse effects" of a blanket denial of the right to "diversion before being charged."

Engler wrote to Harwood's counsel, asking them to consider resolving the matter without further dragging the case through multiple appeals.

Engler is asking the court to "immediately revoke the court policy of refusing to offer diversion to all juveniles charged with felony offenses"; begin the process of creating a method for doing assessments on juveniles before being charged as is the case in every other Ohio county"; and lastly, to have Harwood vacate her Dec. 1 ruling and sustain "objections to the magistrate's ruling in J.B.'s (juvenile) case, absolving his client's record and allowing her to be referred to diversion.

"The proposal made in this letter is a very common-sense solution that helps troubled children of Trumbull County, reduces crime and saves the county money," Engler wrote to close out the letter.

BACKGROUND

The father of the girl at the center of the legal dispute states she was excused from a study hall to look for a missing laptop computer on Nov. 8, 2021, when she encountered another student and started talking with him.

The boy student suggested they go into a second-floor restroom to continue their conversation. They entered a teachers' restroom through an unlocked door. The boy turned off the lights and used his phone for light to lock the door, the lawsuit states.

He then started to kiss and sexually assault her, as she tried to unlock the door to get away, the lawsuit states. A camera in the hallway captured some aspects of the girl's unsuccessful attempt to leave the restroom, and the document states the defendants intentionally erased all the footage relevant to the incident. After the alleged rape, the boy student left the girl on the floor crying, according to the lawsuit.

On Dec. 12, 2021, the girl reported a sexual assault to school officials. Shortly after, the girl said she began to be bullied by friends of the boy student, the lawsuit states. The lawsuit claims the defendants did not conduct any investigation into the girls' allegations and did not do anything to keep the two students separated.

Because of the alleged rape and the subsequent bullying, the plaintiffs claim the girl received no support from the two Liberty school district employees, in the form of in-house counseling or professional support of any kind; and no discipline was imposed on the accused rapist, who was permitted to continue to attend school there. This conduct prevented the girl from the "full range of educational opportunities that should have been available to her as a student of Guy Junior High School."

Another claim states the door of the teachers' second-floor restroom was defectively designed because it did not properly lock and the door opened into the room. This design inhibited the girl's ability to escape, the lawsuit states.