Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
I tkJ5 1537
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
£D In The General Court of Justice
7018 APR 12 P 2: Ob Superior Court Division
VERSUS } COMPLAINT
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board }
NOW COMES, Plaintiff, Pro Se, Tigress Sydney Acute McDaniel, and on behalf of her minor
child, Asa Renee' Bakari Tiger McDaniel (hereinafter "Son"), as his sole natural and general
guardian pursuant to the definition set forth in North Carolina General Statutes, having initiated a
former complaint and having reasonable knowledge and evidenced from the hearing held on
April 10, 2018, over which Judge Lisa Bell presided and notably exhibited judicial misconduct
that far exceeds the threshold for reasonable appearance of bias and conspiracy to carry out
malicious denial of natural justice for Plaintiffs with particularity but not limited to procedural
amendment of her former complaint and proper assignment of other Defendants added to the
complaint under necessary joinder pursuant to NC GS § lA-i, Rule 19, and the elements of NC
GS §1-164, and all other applicable North Carolina law, to exercise due diligence to preserve her
claims for relief and remedy against pettily argued legal loopholes that sorely merit the complete
or even partial dismissal of her complaint against any named Defendant, to submit the following
complaint, hereby asserts, alleges and says:
I.
PARTIES
The Plaintiff, Tigress Sydney Acute McDaniel born December 5, 1976, is a resident of Charlotte,
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. She is the biological mother, markedly single parent, of
Asa Renee' Bakari Tiger McDaniel, born January 18, 2010, who is enrolled in Charlotte
Mecklenburg Schools (hereinafter "CMS"), and has been since August 2015 when beginning
Kindergarten.
2. The Plaintiff, Asa Renee' Bakari Tiger McDaniel (hereinafter "Son" when necessary to
distinguish between Plaintiffs), is the biological son of Tigress Sydney Acute McDaniel. Son has
been enrolled in Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools since August 2015. Son was first assigned to
Winterfield Elementary. Son was transferred to Idlewild Elementary for medical reasons. Son
was transferred to Lawrence On after being subjected to the torts stated herein. Son was, then,
transferred to Eastover Elementary, where he remains enrolled currently.
3. The Defendants, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education (hereinafter "CMS"), which is
synonymous with Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools and otherwise operates Charlotte Mecklenburg
Schools are located and operated in Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. At all times
material hereto, the Defendants carried on in its ordinary course of business at 600 East Fourth
Street, Fifth Floor, Charlotte, NC 28202, and at 4421 Stuart Andrew Blvd, Charlotte, NC 28217,
and at 1600 Tyvola Road, Charlotte, NC 28210, and as such, was doing business in Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina.
4. The Defendant, Patricia Falk (hereinafter "Falk"), is currently a teacher at Eastover Elementary
School, a school amongst CMS. Falk was Son's first assigned homeroom teacher at Eastover
Elementary School.
5. The Defendant, Susan Holloway (hereinafter "Holloway"), upon information and belief, is a
resident of Mecklenburg County, Charlotte, NC. Holloway was the "classroom parent" at all
times material hereto.
- 6. The Defendant, Matthew Slota (hereinafter "Slota"), is currently an Assistant Principal at
Idlewild Elementary School, a school amongst CMS. Slota was the Assistant Principal at this
school at all times material hereto. Upon information and belief, Slota is a resident of
Mecklenburg County, Charlotte, NC.
7. The Defendant, Trayfer Monroe (hereinafter "Monroe"), is currently an Assistant Principal at
Idlewild Elementary School, a school amongst CMS. Slota was the Assistant Principal at this
school at all times material hereto. Upon information and belief, Slota is a resident of
Mecklenburg County, Charlotte, NC.
8. The Defendant, Shauntra Franklin (hereinafter "Franklin"), is currently Dean of Students at
Idlewild Elementary School, a school amongst CMS. Franklin was the Dean of Students at this
school at all times material hereto. Upon information and belief, Franklin is a resident of
Mecklenburg County, Charlotte, NC.
• 9. The Defendant, Leesa Clardy (hereinafter "Clardy"), upon information and belief, is a resident of
Mecklenburg County, Charlotte, NC. Holloway was a "classroom parent" or alternatively, a
volunteer parent, at all times material to the incidents at issue.
10. The Defendant, Susan Nichols (hereinafter "Nichols") is the current principal at Eastover
Elementary, and at all times material to the incidents at issue. Upon information and belief, Susan
Nichols is a resident of Mecklenburg County, Charlotte, North Carolina.
* 11. The Defendant, Taralynn Sullivan (hereinafter "Sullivan") is the current Community
Superintendent for Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools, and Charlotte Mecklenburg Board of
Education (hereinafter "CMS"), for the Central Learning Community, and at all times material to
the incident at issue. Sullivan is the CMS administrator and/or representative who assertedly
investigated the incidents at issue.
12. The Defendant, Cynthia Vines (hereinafter "Vines") is the former District Section 504
Compliance Specialist for CMS, at all times material to incidents at issue prior to the transfer of
Son to Eastover Elementary.
13. The Defendant, F. Lane Williamson (hereinafter "Williamson") is by his own admission a
licensed practicing attorney in this State, and currently appearing as counsel for Susan Holloway,
notably prior to Plaintiff initiating her complaint, and markedly thereafter as well, and has been
an attorney in this State at all times material to the incidents at issue.
14. The Defendant, The Charlotte Observer Publishing Company, is an entity incorporated in this
State, and maintains a principal office operating in its regular course of business as a newspaper
and/or publication in the media industry, and has been at all times material to the incidents at
issue.
15. Plaintiff reserves Defendants John and Jane Does 1 through 30 for information discovered during
pre-trial litigation.
Plaintiff hereby clarifies that she proceeds against all parties who are actual natural persons, by
definition set forth in the North Carolina General and all other applicable law, in their individual
capacity as natural persons domiciled or otherwise present in this State and subject to this court
having personal jurisdiction over such persons in full accordance with NC GS § 1-75.4, not
merely in their official capacity as purported and otherwise implied in Answer by J. Melissa
Woods, counsel on behalf of Patricia Falk, Matthew Slota, Trayfer Monroe, Shauntra Franklin,
Susan Nichols and Taralynn Sullivan.
Plaintiff asserts and clarifies for the sole purpose of exercising due diligence as it is directly
related to NC GS 1A-1, Rule 8 (a) and all other applicable North Carolina law, that when
she uses the term "Defendants" throughout this pleading and any subsequent pleadings,
that she is indeed referring to ALL Defendants named in this action. Plaintiff further
asserts that when she uses the individual names of the Defendants, she intends to identify
them with particularity as it relates to the claims set forth herein and in any subsequent
pleadings.
II.
16. Plaintiff reiterates that this court is vested with jurisdiction over the Defendants because,
at all times material hereto, it was doing business and maintaining a place of business in
Mecklenburg County, in the city of Charlotte, in the State of North Carolina, in full
accordance with NC GS § 1-75.4, having such jurisdiction to hear tort cases and thereby
qualifying as a claim for which relief in this State.
17. The court is vested with jurisdiction over the Plaintiff because, at all times material
hereto, she was a resident of Mecklenburg County, in the city of Charlotte, in the State of
North Carolina.
18.This court is vested with original jurisdiction because the damages sought by the Plaintiff
are in excess of Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00 USD).
19.Venue is proper. However, Plaintiff hereby asserts that she is considering change of
venue pursuant to NC GS § 1-84 for reasons expressed at the beginning of this pleading:
§ 1-84. Removal for fair trial.
In all civil actions in the superior and district courts, when it is suggested on oath or
affirmation on behalf of the plaintiff or defendant, that there are probable grounds
to believe that a fair and impartial trial cannot be obtained in the county in which
the action is pending, the judge may order a copy of the record of the action
removed for trial to any adjacent county, if he is of the opinion that a fair trial
cannot be had in said county, after hearing all the testimony offered on either side
by oral evidence or affidavits. (1806, c. 693, s. 12, P.R.; 1879, s. 45; Code, s. 196;
1899, cc. 104, 508; Rev., s. 426; 1917, c. 44; C.S., s. 471; 1957, c. 601; 1969, c. 44, s. 1;
1971, c. 268, s. 2; 1977, c. 12.)
III.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
20.On or about July 20, 2015, Plaintiff enrolled Son into CMS. CMS assigned Son to
21.Son was born premature, and diagnosed with Acid Reflux in his first year and
Eosinophilic Esophagitis in 2015. Son's primary allergies include dairy or cow's milk
protein and tree nuts. For these reasons, on or about July 20, 2015, Plaintiff also
immediately submitted requests an Eligibility Assessment and Initial 504 Plan Meeting to
CMS.
22.On or about August 21, 2015, because Winterfield did not have a full nor part-time
assigned nurse, amongst other impediments to Son's medical and dietary needs, Plaintiff
23. On or about September 4, 2015, Plaintiff's transfer request was approved under medical
reasons, and Son was reassigned to Idlewild Elementary School (hereinafter "Idlewild").
24. Between September 4 and October 6, 2015, Plaintiff was called by Idlewild on
innumerable occasions to return to the school because Son had either had an accident
related to his esophageal stricture, or under a purporting of bad behavior. After further
inquiry on each occasion, Plaintiff discovered that the Idlewild administrators and
teachers appeared to be taunting Son about his eating impairments, even accusing Son
25. On one of these occasions detailed in paragraph 10, Son's teacher, (hereinafter "Jane 1"
until discovery) claimed that he verbally threatened to kill her. Slota, Monroe, Franklin
telephone that Son was being immediately suspended from school for 3 calendar days as
a form of punitive action. Plaintiff immediately asserted her Son's legal rights against
such suspension without a proper hearing on the issues of the allegation, and with full
knowledge and confidence that her Son hadn't done as accused, and upon information
and belief that such accusation was merely a convenient attempt at retaliation against
asserting her Son's rights under federal and state laws, including but not limited to 504
Section 29 U.S.C. § 794. Plaintiff has since repeatedly submitted formal inquiry
regarding the "referral" in her Son's comprehensive record. Defendants have failed to
provide any information regarding the unlawful referral in his comprehensive record, or
alternatively have failed to sufficiently and properly investigate this matter and respond
to Plaintiff's lawful inquiry and provide proper resolution, remedy and relief for such
erroneous referral that can inarguably result in irreparable harm to Son during his
academic matriculation.
26. On October 7, 2015, Idlewild called Plaintiff once again advising her to return to the
school, purporting that Son's behavior necessitated a "referral" and out of school
suspension. After further inquiry, Slota asked to speak with Plaintiff and advised her that
he "had to force" Son to eat because he was eating too slowly. Slota further stated that he
was sure Son "was testing him and that he needed only toughness [tough love] to break
27. Immeasurably appalled, Plaintiff immediately sought to escalate her inquiry and demand
investigation into Slota's conduct with Son. While awaiting opportunity to speak with
Larenda Denien (hereinafter "Denien"), Monroe and Franklin elaborated upon their
experience(s) with Son, and several inadvertently admitted to use "force" to get Son to
eat, and moreover, finish eating "in a timely manner." Plaintiff was appalled by their
remarks.
28. Plaintiff contacted the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools Police (hereinafter "CMS Police")
29. On or about October 26, 2015, Angelia Bradshaw Cathcart (hereinafter "Cathcart"), a
30. On or about November 6, 2015, having received no response at all from Cathcart nor
Sarah Crowder, said Attorney for CMS, nor from any CMS administrator, articulating
findings from the investigation into the incident, nor proposing any form of relief or
resolve, Plaintiff submitted a formal demand for transfer of Son under unresolved
31. On November 9, 2015, when Plaintiff picked up Son from Idlewild, Son was visibly
flushed and lethargic. Son regurgitated violently for several minutes. Plaintiff reported
this incident to CMS and Idlewild, and received no explanation regarding his sickness
32.Plaintiff informed CMS that Son had surgery scheduled for November 13, 2015. CMS
staff, completely dismissive or alternatively negligent, sent Plaintiff a letter "inviting" her
to the 504 Eligibility Review Meeting she requested. The meeting was rescheduled for
33. On or about November 19, 2015, despite repeated inquiry and markedly repeated
incidents through which Son was subjected to unmitigated abuse, negligence, bullying,
and harassment, both physical and emotional, rooted in unfounded denial of Son's
medical history and condition despite Plaintiff providing full disclosure of Son's medical
records, the first 504 Section Meeting for Son was finally held. The meeting entailed two
primary tasks, Eligibility Review and Development of Initial 504 Accommodations Plan.
During this meeting, Son's eligibility for 504 Accommodations was affirmed by CMS
34. On or about November 19, 2015, Son was transferred to Lawrence Orr Elementary
1. Proper reconciliation of Asa 's attendance records at Idle wild and in toto for this
academic year;
2. Full disclosure of any action or formal record of said referral to Sarah Crowder;
3. And formal apology fro,n idle wild.
Ms.McManiel,
I don't have in' case file in front of me but Pin sure I closed my case file out by attempting
to call you and email you with a response from the Asst District Attorney Office. Based
on the information collected, there was insufficient evidence to show that your son was
assaulted. I came to interview your son with you present and asked him several times as
to what took place. Your son repeatedly stated, "he broke my heart and it can't be fixed."
I asked your son did Mr. Sow grab him or hurt him in any way? Your son stated again
that "he hurt my feelings and broke my heart. "Ms. MsDaniel I clearly understand from a
child's perspective that he is truly hurt; however, after presenting this case to the ADA it
37. To date, the CMS has failed to conduct a proper investigation into the injuries sustained
by Son as a direct result from the torts at the hand of Slota, Franklin and Monroe. Upon
information and belief, there are other unknown administrators and teachers who also
Elementary School, and otherwise, conspired to conceal or not report the tortuous
assaulted Son and alternatively intimidated, harassed and verbally threatened Son on an
indefinite number of occurrences while Son was enrolled at Idlewild Elementary School.
39. On or about September 19, 2016, Son's 504 Annual Review Meeting was held for the
40. Between September 19 and November 28, 2016, regarding Son's 504 Plan, there were
more literature regarding Eosinophilic Esophagitis, and recent medical records with
diagrams to provide the Lawrence Orr staff with greater insight into Son's condition.
Plaintiff informed CMS and Lawrence Orr that Son's doctor had discovered additional
41. On December 5, 2016, during the 504 Review Meeting, Cynthia Vines, 504 Coordinator
for CMS, and Kimberly Vaught, principal at Lawrence Orr advised Plaintiff that they
could not accommodate Son's needs, and suggested a school transfer. Scott McCully
(hereinafter "McCully") asked Plaintiff to reconsider the transfer request until, at least,
504 Plan, and a completely nonproductive 504 Review Meeting, Plaintiff then informed
McCully that she thought it was best to proceed with the transfer.
43. On December 6, 2016, McCully advised Plaintiff that Eastover Elementary was available
and further recommended that she strongly consider that school. Plaintiff visited the
school as directed by Scully, and upon arrival was confronted by Nichols who purported
that she was lying about being referred to Eastover by McCully, and further threatened
her "with police arrest if she didn't leave or if she returned without authorization."
Nichols also exclaimed to Plaintiff that "she was the sole authority who would decide if
he [Son] could enroll at Eastover." To date, even after Son's enrollment, Nichols have
44. Because McCully had become evasive to Plaintiff's inquiry about the transfer to
Eastover, and under duress and significant emotional distress, Plaintiff initiated an
administrative complaint with the United States Department of Agriculture Civils Rights
Division to seek intercessory relief and the enforcement of Son's 504 Section rights.
45. From December 6, 2016 to April 27, 2017, CMS, with specificity to McCully, Ann Clark
(hereinafter "Clark"), former Superintendent for CMS, and Susan Nichols (hereinafter
impeded or otherwise refused Son's transfer. During this time, because the risks of
noncompliance of Son's 504 Plan were imminent at Lawrence Orr, Plaintiff was forced to
effectually home school Son until his transfer was approved and processed.
violation of Son's 504 Plan through the United States Department of Agriculture Civil
Rights Division (hereinafter "USDA") against CMS and Defendants who were or are
employees of CMS.
47. On or about April 18, 2017, the Resolution agreement was entered by the USDA to
which CMS agreed to fully comply, which markedly included the full compliance of any
teachers, administrators, parent volunteers, class parents or any other parties who would
come into contact with Son during any given school day.
48. On or about May 30, 2017, upon the agreement of CMS to fully comply with Son's 504
Plan and rights, without further contest, and markedly, at the close of the 2016-2017
Academic Year, Son's transfer was approved and processed, and he was enrolled and
resumed attendance on June 5, 2017, markedly, for the last week of school before the
summer break.
49. On or about June 5, 2017, a 504 Review Meeting was held at Eastover.
50. On or about May 30, 2017, Plaintiff was introduced to Holloway by Son. Son had
become instant friends with Holloway's Son, said "JB," and Son wanted them to meet to
plan play dates. Plaintiff and Holloway maintained cordial interaction during the period
spanning May 30, 2017 and October 16, 2017. In fact, Plaintiff and Holloway would
often engage friendly conversation each afternoon when picking up children from school,
and had discussed plans for play dates on several occasions during this period. Plaintiff
informed Holloway about Son's food allergies when they discussed the reason for his
transfer, because Holloway noticed that Son began attending Eastover Elementary at the
end of the school year. Holloway was and is sufficiently informed that Son has life-
51. On or about August 25, 2017, a 504 Review Meeting was held at Eastover for the 2017-
2018 Academic Year. Plaintiff was introduced to Falk as Son's assigned homeroom
teacher. Falk remained and participated during the entire 504 Review Meeting. Falk was
and is sufficiently informed about Son's life threatening food allergies, surgeries and
peer bullying and that from fiduciaries, noncompliance with his 504 Plan, and unlawful
Falk is sufficiently informed about Son's 504 Plan and Individualized Emergency Plan
(hereinafter "IEP"). Falk is sufficiently informed that Son's reaction to food allergies
does not necessarily result in physical symptoms such as hives as consistent with general
food allergies. Falk is sufficiently informed that Son undergoes frequent surgeries to
dilate the opening of Son's stomach to allow for the passing of food for his nutritional
health. Falk is sufficiently informed that outside snacks are disallowed in Son's
classroom pursuant to 504 Plan. Falk is sufficiently informed that if Son consumed food
products with dairy, eggs, shellfish, tree nuts, the opening of Son's stomach becomes
inflamed and swells effectually closing the opening to his stomach, resulting in food
impeded from passing for digestion and Son experiencing chronic and violent vomiting.
53. Defendants are sufficiently informed of ALL set forth in paragraph 50. Defendants
understand or are otherwise sufficiently aware that they are enjoined to fully comply with
Son's 504 Plan and IEP. Defendants understand or are otherwise sufficiently aware that
both state and federal law enjoin CMS, staff, teacher, parent volunteer, class parent, CMS
police compliance with Son's 504 Plan and IEP. Defendants understand or are otherwise
sufficiently aware that failing to comply or negligent noncompliance can result in Son's
death and/or complications with his medical condition, increased frequency of surgeries
to remedy and relieve Son from complications, increased medical expenses for Plaintiff,
increased absences from school for Son, increased absences from work for Plaintiff and
55. On October 16, 2017, Son brought home M&Ms in his storage containers provided by
Plaintiff. Son was excited to inform Plaintiff that he could now eat M&Ms "because they
were dairy-free." Plaintiff was appalled. Son explained further that "it was okay because"
Susan Holloway, who he calls "Ms. Holloway" after becoming friends with her son "JB,"
56. On October 16, 2017, Leesa Clardy, upon information and belief, and now by her own admission
in a statement on record in state court, and Holloway were both present during the class party as a
class parent volunteers, and brought M&Ms, gave M&Ms, or otherwise allowed access to such
M&Ms for Son's consumption, and even persuaded Son to consume M&Ms against his own
asserted concerns of milk being an ingredient, to which they together or otherwise separately
beguiling Son about the milk content of the M&Ms. To reiterate, milk is the primary allergen for
Son's condition. Upon discovery of such allergen by Son's gastroenterologist, dairy was excluded
from his diet. This dietary change was made in 2016. All Defendants were sufficiently informed
57. On October 16, 2017, Holloway, Falk, and Clardy gave M&Ms that contain dairy, Son's
primary food allergen, to Son, which he did consume and suffer an allergic reaction and
increase in the frequency of surgeries Son has had to undergo since the latter part of
2017. Son has had to now undergo monthly surgeries to dilate the opening of his stomach
to effectually stay ahead of any possible occurrences of noncompliance with Son's 504
Plan at school.
58. Since receiving the diagnosis for Son's EoE, Plaintiff, although having no such known
food allergies and having been tested for the same, has drastically altered her diet to be
consistent with Son's diet to give him a sense of normality and solidarity. Accordingly,
Son has no access to food allergens at home. Son does not attend any after school
programs, since experiencing complications resulting from noncompliance with his 504
Plan at Lawrence On Elementary School. Son does not have a babysitter. Plaintiff
generally keeps Son with her at all times when he is not at school.
59. Plaintiff immediately contacted Eastover and Nichols to demand an investigation into the
incident. The investigation has not yet been carried out properly. CMS has confirmed,
however, that Falk gave the M&Ms to Son, and further that Holloway and Clardy were
present as parent volunteers at all times material to this incident. Clardy, by her own
admission, has voluntarily asserted that she was present in the classroom during the
incident on October 16, 2017. No further explanation has been provided. Such
dismissiveness reflects a blatant, uncontrite disregard for Son's rights, and moreover, the
rights for Plaintiff as his mother. The repeated torts are sufficient cause for this civil
complaint.
60. On March 20, 2018, Ann Doss Helms (hereinafter "Helms") left a voicemail message for
Plaintiff at her campaign telephone number asking that she call her to discuss the civil
complaint and expressing the oddity of the complaint naming "two parent volunteers as
Defendants." Plaintiff immediately suspected that helms had ill and malicious intentions,
mainly because she has been publicized as the "whistleblower" politician and generally
depicted in a negative way by the media as standing firm against corrupt legal, judicial,
and state and municipal government officials, and even corrupt police officers. Plaintiff,
in an effort of due diligence and transparency to protect her reputation, she addressed and
(hereinafter "Observer") using the Twitter platform advising firmly that she had not sued
"as a candidate" and further that she was not willing to discuss the complaint with the
media. Plaintiff has also warned or otherwise inferred with a hashtag that Helms need
61. On March 30, 2018, Helms and Observer published an article that contained statements
that exceed or otherwise meet the threshold for libel, slander, defamation, albeit direct
and general or per Se. The article highlighted statements made by CMS and Clardy
directly to Helms and Observer, which Helms designated with quotes. Clardy made
knowingly false statements about Plaintiff to expose her to public hatred, contempt and
ridicule, and to ultimately damage her reputation. Helms and Observer published the
large, and moreover as a rationale mind, competent pro se litigant and fit parent. In fact,
one particular statement made by Clardy is immeasurably alarming about the suspicion of
criminal intent:
Clardy says her son was in the same class as McDaniel 's son but she did not know the
child. She says she encountered McDaniel in October when Clardy came to the class to
get students to sign a card for a sick teacher. McDaniel asked Clardy 's name, and Clardy
says she thought no more about it until she received legal papers adding her to the
lawsuit. That motion, filed Feb. 6, says only that Clardy was a classroom parent "at all
Plaintiff reasserts that she has never met Clardy. Plaintiff reasserts that she was NOT
present at Eastover Elementary School during the class party incident at issue. Plaintiff
asserts that all Defendants, including Clardy, are fully aware that Plaintiff was not present
at Eastover Elementary School during this incident. The article and Clardy's statements
are prima facie evidence of defamation, libel, and slander, and assertedly criminal intent
beyond civil liability to expose Plaintiff and her Son to public hatred, contempt, and
ridicule, and ultimately damage her reputation as a viable candidate for Charlotte
62. Furthermore, since October 16, 2017, F. Lane Williamson (hereinafter "Williamson"),
has knowingly maliciously and wantonly communicated threats and personal attacks
upon Plaintiff threatening to expose her to contempt, hatred, ridicule by the court and
expose Plaintiff to contempt, hatred and ridicule of/by the court and general public.
Williamson has attempted or wantonly conspired to use the statements and information
defraud the court to enter a gatekeeper order against Plaintiff which would deny her
submitted a Cease and Desist Demand to Observer and other Defendants in full
accordance with NC GS § 14-47 and all other applicable North Carolina law.
64. As of April 12, 2018, Helms nor Observer nor any other Defendants have complied with
retraction, apology or any other guidelines for relief and remedy set forth in NC US § 14-
47.
65. Instead, on April 10, 2018, evidently immediately following the conclusion of the hearing
held on April 10, 2018 regarding the case preceding this action, Helms and Observer
slanderous statements and information, and knowingly and maliciously so. The second,
markedly repeat offense sorely ever qualifies as negligent or mistaken. Defendants, all
Defendants, are knowingly engaging the attempt and conspiracy to expose Plaintiff and
her Son to public contempt, hatred, and ridicule and, moreover, that by the court to
Commissioner At large, and moreover as a rationale mind, competent pro se litigant and
fit parent.
66. Upon such information and prima facie evidence and belief, Defendants will not cease
and desist. Even more so, Defendants have shown absolutely no contrite disposition
throughout this entire ordeal, back as far as Son's initial enrollment into CMS in August
of 2015.
IV.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Personal Injury - Negligence Per Se and Alternatively, Willful,
Wanton Negligence - And Other Torts)
67. Plaintiff reasserts and realleges all set forth in paragraphs 1 through 34.
68. The Defendants are sufficiently informed about the severity of Son's allergies, 504 Plan,
504 Section Federal Statutes that govern and enjoin full compliance.
69. Despite having full disclosure of Son's medical records and full cooperation of Plaintiff,
Defendants have negligently subjected Son and Plaintiff to injuries, and alternatively,
b. Emotional Distress;
go
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Bullying, Intimidating, Harassment, Retaliation and Other Misconduct and Willful or
Alternatively Negligent Violation of Charlotte Mecklenburg Board of Education Policy and
Standard of Conduct for Employees and Parent Volunteers as set forth in NC GS § 1 15C, and §
1 15C-308. Rules For Teacher's Conduct, Which Empowers or Otherwise Allows Such Policy To
Be Enforced by The Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools Board of Education)
70. Plaintiff reasserts and realleges all set forth in paragraphs 1 through 37.
71. Defendants have negligently and alternatively willfully and maliciously repeatedly
subjected Plaintiff and Son to bullying, intimidation, retaliation and other egregious,
concerted acts of misconduct in direct, knowing violation of policy set forth by the
d. JICK Bullying;
e. JK Student Discipline;
h. JL Student Wellness;
j. JRA Students Records, and all other standards set forth in policy.
VI.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(Material, Fundamental, and Anticipatory Breach of Contract, Breach of Covenant,
Negligence Per Se)
72. Plaintiff reasserts and realleges all set forth in paragraphs 1 through 39.
73. Defendants have negligently and alternatively willfully and maliciously repeatedly
violated the express agreement of the 504 Plan, the agreement entered by the USDA Civil
Rights Division, IEP, all qualifying as express legal contracts and any and all contracts
prima facie, related directly to parent volunteers, class parents or otherwise. which
enjoins them under State and Federal law, and the policy and standards of conduct set
agreement entered by the USDA Civil Rights Division, IEP and covenants implied and/or
explicitly set forth in the Charlotte Mecklenburg Board of Education Policy and
Standards for Employees, and Parent Volunteers, et cetera and all applicable North
Carolina law.
VI.
75. Plaintiff reasserts and realleges all set forth in paragraphs 1 through 42.
76. The Plaintiff has suffered financial hardship in having been forced to effectually
homeschool Son, while completing her dissertative research, operating her business
77. Plaintiff incurred additional medical expenses to effectually remedy and treat effects
suffered by Son related to his Eosinophilic Esophagitis resulting from the Defendants
knowing and willfully giving him M&Ms under deception or alternatively negligently
giving or otherwise bringing such prohibited food items to the classroom and allowing
78. Plaintiff lost clients and other business growth opportunities as a result of having stricter
limitations on time she could allot as a direct result from the injuries inflicted by
79. Son has suffered both emotional and physical pain and suffering throughout this entire
ordeal.
80. Plaintiffs have suffered irreparable harm, emotional and physical pain and suffering.
VII.
81. Defendants have directly communicated, and alternatively indirectly and negligently
about Plaintiffs to local news reporters and other media related entities that are
ridicule.
VIII.
DAMAGES
82. The Plaintiffs have suffered general and special, incidental and consequential damages
as the direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of the Defendant, which
damages are in excess of Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) and shall be fully
proven at the time of trial. These damages include, but are not limited to,
a. damages for wage loss;
b. medical and medical-related expenses;
c. travel and travel-related expenses;
d. emotional distress and suffering;
e. psychological trauma and anxiety;
f. physical pain;
g. physical injury;
h. and all other ordinary, incidental and consequential damages as would be
anticipated to arise under the circumstances set forth in this complaint.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays for the following remedy and relief:
(1) That the Plaintiffs, Tigress Sydney Acute McDaniel and Asa Renee' Bakari Tiger
McDaniel, recover judgment for compensatory damages, as shall be determined to fully
and fairly compensate them for all general, special, incidental and consequential damages
respectively incurred by them as the direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions
of the Defendant, together with interest until satisfied;
(2) That the Plaintiffs recover punitive damages incurred or to be incurred in excess of
twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) in full accordance with NC GS § lA-i Rule 8,
General Rules of Pleadings; and
(3) That the Plaintiffs recover his costs from the Defendants and BE MADE WHOLE;
(4) That Defendants issue a public apology to Plaintiffs; and
(5) That the court award such other and further relief as it deems necessary and equitable in
the circumstances.
on