Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, COVERAGE, LIABILITY—5th Cir.: Sexually abused student entitled to $250K verdict against school district that rehired offender, (Aug 26, 2025)

By Marjorie Johnson, J.D.

The school board voted to rehire the high school teacher despite his alleged “inappropriate, boundary-blurring behavior with students” and “close personal and potentially sexual relationship with a male minor student.”

The Fifth Circuit upheld a $250,000 jury verdict in favor of a high school student who brought a Section 1983 lawsuit against a school district that rehired a teacher who was later convicted of sexually abusing him, despite knowledge of the teacher’s past history of forming inappropriate relationships with students, including a student with whom he formed a public sexual relationship. The record supported the jury’s finding that the school board’s decision to rehire the teacher “was the moving force” that caused the plaintiff to suffer physical sexual abuse, and the jury also reasonably found that school board members acted with deliberate indifference in voting to rehire him despite their awareness of serious allegations about his past inappropriate relationships with students and their personal concerns stemming from those allegations (Loera v. Kingsville Independent School District, No. 24-40481 (5th Cir. Aug. 22, 2025)).

Inappropriate conduct. In 2008, Kingsville Independent School District (KISD) hired the teacher to teach theatre at the high school. During his tenure, he went to parties with students, took them to restaurants, and bought them expensive gifts. He also began texting and then flirting with one student, which progressed into a sexual relationship. One colleague complained that the inappropriate relationship was allowed because the teacher’s parents were friends with board members. After the student graduated in 2011, he moved in with the teacher and they made their relationship public on social media.

Seeks rehire. The teacher left the high school in 2012 after he failed to pass his certification exam, and from 2012 to 2015, he taught in another school district. In 2015, he reapplied to teach again at the KISD high school, and its previous assistant principal gave him a positive personal reference.

Heated discussions. In summer 2015, the superintendent met with the school board and recommended his rehire. However, two members who had children at the high school during his previous employment objected. One member voiced concerns over rumors about his “inappropriate” relationships with students, including that he attended parties with them and taught his class how to put on a condom using a banana. The other heard that a male student had graduated early to pursue a relationship with him and found a Facebook post that indicated the two were in a sexual relationship.

Rehired despite objections. The superintendent tabled the discussion so that she could further investigate. When the board met again on July 6, she shared that she had found no records regarding the two board members’ concerns and had received a glowing reference from the other district’s assistant superintendent. The board engaged in another heated discussion regarding his candidacy, with the two members continuing to express major concerns. Ultimately, the board voted 4-2 to rehire him for the next school year.

Reprimands. On April 12, 2016, the school reprimanded him for discussing with students who the “prettiest girls” were. On September 6, he received another letter placing him on administrative leave because of “allegations of inappropriate conduct with students” after he attended a private, out-of-school party with students. However, the district later found “no specific evidence of inappropriate conduct” and assigned him back to his position.

Sexually abused plaintiff. In the fall of 2017, the teacher requested that students in his theatre class provide their phone numbers, and he soon began “casually” texting the plaintiff. A few weeks later, he told the student that he “wanted to know what all the hype was about” and repeatedly asked for photographs of his genitals. The student sent him a photograph, hoping the requests would stop. However, his texts became even more insistent and explicit, and the student sent him five or six additional photographs. The teacher also bought him food, shoes, watches, sunglasses, and a gold chain. He also kissed him on one occasion and, after delivering food to his home one evening, ran his hand down the student’s chest towards his “private parts.”

Convicted. The student’s family discovered the text messages and called the police. The teacher was thereafter convicted of online solicitation of a minor and attempted possession of child pornography in connection with his abuse of the student.

Victim sues, wins at trial. The student subsequently brought this lawsuit alleging the school district violated Section 1983 and Title IX by rehiring the teacher despite his history of inappropriate conduct with students. The case proceeded to trial and a jury unanimously ruled in his favor on both claims and awarded him $250,000 in damages.

Appeal. On appeal, the school district argued that the court erred in denying its renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law. The Fifth Circuit disagreed, concluding the evidence supported the jury’s finding of liability as to the student’s Section 1983 claim.

“Moving force.” The Fifth Circuit rejected the school district’s contention that the student could not establish municipal liability under Section 1983 since the record did not support the jury’s finding that its decision to rehire the teacher “was the moving force” that caused him to suffer the teacher’s physical sexual abuse. In particular, the evidence showed that when the teacher was employed at the high school the first time, “he groomed students with gifts, blurred the lines between teacher and students by attending high school parties at which alcohol was served, demonstrated condom use on a banana in class, and engaged in a very close personal and possibly sexual relationship with a minor student.”

This is very similar conduct to the conduct for which he was ultimately convicted in connection with his abuse of the plaintiff during his second stint of teaching at the high school. “Where the offending employee previously engaged in the same or similar misconduct alleged as part of the § 1983 claim, we have concluded that ‘moving force’ causation exists,” stated the Fifth Circuit.

Deliberate indifference. The record also supported the jury’s finding that the board acted with deliberate indifference in rehiring the teacher. Indeed, several members testified that they had notice of allegations that he had inappropriate relationships with students in the past. The two trustees who voted no also repeatedly raised their concerns, and one of the “yes” votes stated that it was the “hardest” vote he had ever made. He also suggested the superintendent was pressured by another trustee who had a close friendship with the teacher’s father.

Thus, there was ample evidence that despite their awareness of these serious allegations about the teacher’s past inappropriate relationships with students and their personal concerns stemming from these allegations, the board voted 4-2 to rehire him. And based on this evidence, the jury could have reasonably concluded that the board “disregarded a known or obvious consequence of [its] action” when it rehired the teacher.

The case is No. 24-40481.

Judge: Per curiam.

Attorneys: Mikell A. West (Bandas Law Firm) for Robert M. The student. Eduardo G. Garza (Esparza & Garza) for Kingsville Independent School District.

Companies: Kingsville Independent School District

Cases: CoverageLiability IndividualRights PublicEmployees SexualHarassment LouisianaNews MississippiNews TexasNews