Second Circuit reinstates lawsuit against Schoharie County school district

A federal appeals court has reinstated a lawsuit filed by a man accused of improperly touching a student while visiting a public school.

Plaintiff Keith Schiebel appealed a District Court ruling dismissing his lawsuit against the Schoharie Central School District (SCSD), Kristin DuGuay, the district’s Title IX coordinator, and Superintendent David Blanchard.

Schiebel is represented by Jared K. Cook and Karen R. Sanders, of Tully Rinckey PLLC.

Schiebel is a veteran agriculture educator. In 2021, he brought the Mobile Maple Experience — a trailer with educational programming about the maple syrup industry to the school district.

About a month later, SCSD Superintendent Blanchard informed Schiebel that the mother of a student claimed that Schiebel made her daughter feel uncomfortable during the program and that he was filing a Title IX report.

For several weeks afterward, Schiebel asked for information about the specific allegations, but the requests were ignored, according to the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

When district officials agreed to discuss the matter, the meeting lasted about 25 minutes. Schiebel claims that DuGuay was “hostile and accusatory” throughout the meeting.

When Schiebel arrived, DuGuay told him “her back was to the wall and she was aware of the exits” because she was scared of him, according to the Second Circuit decision written by Judge Steven J. Menashi.

DuGuay told Schiebel a student said that, during the maple syrup program, Schiebel “reached around her with two hands and had touched her breast and buttocks.”

Schiebel did not recall the student or the incident, but he said that it was possible that “he may have reached around a student at one point in the trailer to get something,” according to the decision.

After Schiebel made that statement, DuGuay abruptly ended the meeting. Two weeks later, DuGuay determined that the sexual harassment allegation against Schiebel was well-founded, Menashi wrote.

In a letter reporting the findings of her investigation DuGuay explained that the student “alleged conduct that, whether intentional or not … constitutes sexual harassment in violation of (school district) policy.”

DuGuay decided that the harassment occurred because Schiebel “did not deny that he ‘may have reached around the student’ while attempting to reach for cups and supplies.”

The school district banned the Mobile Maple Experience from its campus for five years. Schiebel lost his job as a result of DuGuay’s letter. Schiebel appealed the decision to Blanchard, who upheld it.

Schiebel then filed his lawsuit against the district. He asserted that the school district erroneously found that he committed sexual harassment because of its sex-based bias and state law claims against the district, DuGuay, and Blanchard.

The district court dismissed the Title IX claim, holding that although Schiebel had plausibly alleged that the finding was erroneous, he had not plausibly alleged that sex-based bias “was a motivating factor behind the erroneous finding.”

The Second Circuit reversed that decision.

“We conclude that Schiebel has plausibly alleged that SCSD discriminated against him on the basis of sex in violation of Title IX,” Menashi wrote.

“The complaint states a Title IX claim under either of two theories. First, the allegations indicate that the school district was deliberately indifferent to the truth or falsity of the accusations against him because its investigation was so deficient as to constitute a sham grievance process and its decision was inexplicable,” Menashi wrote.

“Second, the allegations indicate that the school district affirmatively discriminated against Schiebel because the Title IX coordinator exhibited bias against Schiebel based on his sex,” he wrote.

[email protected] / (585) 232-2035