ROPE/Chaffin Lawsuit Against Stillwater Public Schools – Request For Summary Judgement Heard Today

ROPE/Chaffin Lawsuit Against Stillwater Public Schools – Request For Summary Judgement Heard Today

This beautiful October morning, Attorney Maria Seidler argued for Summary Judgement in the case of Brice Chaffin and ROPE v Stillwater Public Schools.

Yet another hurdle in the case of Brice Chaffin and ROPE against Stillwater Public Schools was met this morning (10.21.22).  

Back in July, we updated readers about our ongoing lawsuit against SPS filed on behalf of Brice Chaffin, a member of the district who had been removed from the podium during his public comment regarding the policy of SPS to allow boys in the girl’s bathrooms.  At that time, we were happy to report that Judge Kistler (Payne County Court) refused to dismiss our lawsuit against SPS, setting a further court date for today.

Don’t forget – all ROPE and Chaffin are asking for is a PUBLIC APOLOGY from SPS for their mistreatment of Chaffin.  We chose a motion of Summary Judgement (asking Judge Kistler to decide the case) to prevent further taxing the legal system, not because we didn’t believe we could win a jury trial.  Certainly we all believe we could.

This morning, Attorney, Maria Seidler, argued for the Judge to decide for our case, while SPS’s attorneys obviously argued for their side.  

We were hoping the judge would rule from the bench this morning, however, he chose to review the video of the meeting a further time before rendering a written judgement that will be sent to the attorneys representing the parties.

This was disappointing of course, as we would have liked to know the outcome of the case sooner rather than later, but Maria was eloquent in her arguments for our side and the SPS’s attorneys argument that Mr. Chaffin was an interruption to the School Board meeting that required removal action from the Board in order to proceed, rang inevitably hollow.  

Beginning to comment at 30 seconds into his 3 minute comment time, continuing to further interrupt Chaffin additional times and then having him escorted from the room via police escort couldn’t POSSIBLY have been any less of an interruption to Board business than simply letting Mr. Chaffin – who was fully civil and under his own self-possession – finish his 3 minute statement.

Certainly, as soon as we get word from the Judge regarding his decision, we will pass the information onto you.

In the meantime (and again), continue to think on these two things:

Taxpayers paid for TWO ATTORNEYS to deal with a lawsuit that could have been resolved via a PUBLIC APOLOGY for mistreatment of a parent and community member by SPS Board Members during one of their regularly scheduled open meetings.

How much money will it cost taxpayers – and how much will the ATTORNEYS MAKE OFF TAXPAYERS – to fight a suit in which SPS is clearly in the wrong and over a simple public apology?