Case: McCartney v. Mayes Sch. Dist. 32

4:99-cv-00660 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma

Filed Date: Aug. 10, 1999

Closed Date: 2000

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On August 10, 1999, parents, on behalf of their minor daughters, filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma against Independent School District No. 32 of Mayes County, alleging that the school district had violated Title IX of the Education Amendment, 20 U.S.C. § 1681, and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment through disparate treatment of female students with respect to providing an equal opportunity to participate in interscholastic…

On August 10, 1999, parents, on behalf of their minor daughters, filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma against Independent School District No. 32 of Mayes County, alleging that the school district had violated Title IX of the Education Amendment, 20 U.S.C. § 1681, and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment through disparate treatment of female students with respect to providing an equal opportunity to participate in interscholastic and other school-sponsored athletics. The plaintiffs sought class certification on behalf of all present and future female students enrolled at Chouteau Public Schools who participate, seek to participate, or are deterred from participating in interscholastic and/or other school-sponsored athletics at Chouteau Public Schools.

Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that the school district violated the female students' rights by knowingly and intentionally offering sports and levels of competition in a manner which discriminates against female students. Additionally, the complaint alleged that the defendants had discriminated against female students with respect to equipment and supplies provided, scheduling of games and practice times, travel, the opportunity to receive qualified coaching, the assignment and compensation of coaches, provision of locker rooms and facilities for both practice and competition and publicity. The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment that the defendants had violated the students' rights and an injunction requiring the defendants to cease their discriminatory practices and remedy the effects of such practices and discriminatory conduct.

The District Court (Judge Michael Burrage) certified the class in an order dated October 28, 1999. On November 2, 1999, the District Court (Magistrate Judge Claire V. Eagan) set a settlement conference for March 13, 2000. The parties entered a joint stipulation of dismissal on May 25, 2000, and Judge Burrage approved a settlement agreement on June 27, 2000.

In the agreement the school district agreed to take affirmative steps to increase female student participate in athletics. They agreed to conduct a survey to determine interest in women's volleyball and soccer at the high school level, and volleyball, soccer and fast and slow pitch softball at the middle school level, and to add those sports for which there was interest. The school district also agreed to establish a system for accounting for revenues and expenditures for male and female sports. The district also agreed to schedule basketball games on a gender-neutral basis and to treat female students equivalent to male with respect to travel, food, lodging and other similar privileges.

The District Court (Judge Burrage) dismissed the case on July 17, 2000.

Summary Authors

Carlyn Williams (3/17/2014)

People

Judge(s)

Burrage, Michael Sean (Oklahoma)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Schiller, Samuel (Tennessee)

Yasser, Raymond (Oklahoma)

Attorney for Defendant

Long, Karen Lea (Oklahoma)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

4:99-cv-00660

Docket

July 17, 2000

July 17, 2000

Docket
1

4:99-cv-00660

Class Action Complaint

Aug. 10, 1999

Aug. 10, 1999

Complaint
9

4:99-cv-00660

Order for Class Action Certification

Oct. 28, 1999

Oct. 28, 1999

Order/Opinion
21

4:99-cv-00660

Settlement Agreement

June 27, 2000

June 27, 2000

Settlement Agreement
22

4:99-cv-00660

Joint Stipulation of Dismissal

July 17, 2000

July 17, 2000

Order/Opinion

Docket

Last updated March 23, 2025, 9:18 a.m.

ECF Number Date Description Link
1 Aug. 10, 1999

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT (fee status: pd) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 08/10/1999)

PACER
Aug. 10, 1999

FILING FEE PAID IN FULL by plaintiffs on 8/10/99 in the amount of $ 150.00 receipt # 87489 (fee status: pd) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 08/10/1999)

PACER
2 Aug. 26, 1999

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiffs by Samuel J Schiller (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 08/26/1999)

PACER
4 Sept. 30, 1999

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendants Mayes Sch Dist 32 &John Phillips by Karen Lea Long (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 10/01/1999)

PACER
5 Sept. 30, 1999

ANSWER by defendants Mayes Sch Dist 32 &defendant John Phillips to complt [1−1] (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 10/01/1999)

PACER
Oct. 4, 1999

MINUTE ORDER: ; CASE MANAGEMENT CONF set for 11:15 a.m., 10/28/99 . Parties are directed to comply with the Local Rules of Court in regard to the submission of the Case Management Plan. (cc: all counsel) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 10/04/1999)

PACER
6 Oct. 15, 1999

MOTION by plaintiffs to certify class action (o/j) (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 10/18/1999)

PACER
7 Oct. 15, 1999

BRIEF by plaintiffs in support of their motion to certify class action [6−1] (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 10/18/1999)

PACER
8 Oct. 22, 1999

CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN Received (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 10/25/1999)

PACER
9 Oct. 28, 1999

ORDER by Judge Michael Burrage granting motion to certify class action [6−1]; Pltfs need not provide any formal ntc to any members of the certified class (cc: all counsel) (crp, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 10/29/1999)

PACER
10 Oct. 28, 1999

MINUTES: by Judge Michael Burrage ; Case Management Conference held 10/28/99 . Parties approve Order re Class Certification. Order signed. Schedo entered. Pltf's req/monthly status conf. denied at this time. If need arises, counsel to file a request. [N/R] (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 10/29/1999)

PACER
11 Oct. 28, 1999

SCHEDULING ORDER Judge Michael Burrage motion filing ddl set for 3/6/00 discovery due 2/25/00 proposed pretrial order due 5/22/00 ; PRETRIAL CONF set for 10:00 5/25/00 ; TRIAL set for 9:30 6/19/00 ETT: 8−10 days. Setcon to be set in Mar '00 and parties DO NOT consent to adjunct. [cc: counsel/MJ] (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 10/29/1999)

PACER
12 Nov. 1, 1999

ORDER by Magistrate Claire V. Eagan SETTLMT CONF set for 9:30 3/13/00 before Magistrate Claire V. Eagan (cc: all counsel) (sjm, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 11/01/1999)

PACER
13 Jan. 31, 2000

FINAL WITNESS list by plaintiff Robert McCartney, plaintiff Cheryl McCartney, plaintiff Deborah Johnson, plaintiff Michael Johnson, plaintiff Daniel Jantz, plaintiff Kelly Jantz (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 02/01/2000)

PACER
14 Jan. 31, 2000

WITNESS list by defendant Mayes Sch Dist 32, defendant John Phillips (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 02/02/2000)

PACER
15 Feb. 18, 2000

MOTION by plaintiff Robert McCartney, plaintiff Cheryl McCartney, plaintiff Deborah Johnson, plaintiff Michael Johnson, plaintiff Daniel Jantz, plaintiff Kelly Jantz, defendant Mayes Sch Dist 32, defendant John Phillips, defendant John Doe to extend deadlines imposed by sched order (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 02/18/2000)

PACER
16 Feb. 22, 2000

ORDER by Judge Michael Burrage granting joint motion to extend deadlines imposed by sched order [15−1]; discovery ddl re set for 3/27/00; motion filing ddl reset for 4/3/00; pretrial order ddl reset for 5/22/00; PRETRIAL CONF reset for 10:00 5/25/00 ; TRIAL reset for 9:30 6/19/00 before Judge Michael Burrage (see ord for further ddlns) (cc: all counsel) (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 02/23/2000)

PACER
17 March 14, 2000

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE REPORT by Magistrate Judge Claire V. Eagan advising litigation was settled, as soon as practicable parties shall file mtn to approve consent decree; Settlement Conference held 3/13/00 (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 03/14/2000)

PACER
18 March 28, 2000

MINUTE ORDER: by Judge Michael Burrage ; Due to Court conflict, PRETRIAL CONF, heretofore set 5/25/00, is ADVANCED to 10:30 a.m., 5/23/00 (cc: all counsel) (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 03/28/2000)

PACER
20 May 25, 2000

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AS TO DEFENDANT JOHN PHILLIPS, SUPERINTENDENT OF CHOUTEAU−MAZIE PUBLIC SCHOOLS (crp, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 05/30/2000)

PACER
21 June 27, 2000

ORDER (SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT) by Judge Michael Burrage (cc: all counsel) (sac, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 06/28/2000)

PACER
22 July 17, 2000

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL w/ prej by defendant John Phillips, defendant Mayes Sch Dist 32, plaintiff Kelly Jantz, plaintiff Daniel Jantz, plaintiff Michael Johnson, plaintiff Deborah Johnson, plaintiff Cheryl McCartney, plaintiff Robert McCartney; CASE DISMISSED (fe, Dpty Clk) (Entered: 07/17/2000)

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory:

Oklahoma

Case Type(s):

Education

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Aug. 10, 1999

Closing Date: 2000

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Parents, on behalf of and as next of friend of their minor daughters, and on behalf of all female students who participate, seek to participate, or are deterred from participating in interscholastic and other school-sponsored athletics at Chouteau Public Schools.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

School District

Independent School District No. 32 of Mayes County

Defendant Type(s):

Elementary/Secondary School

Facility Type(s):

Government-run

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681 et seq.

Constitutional Clause(s):

Equal Protection

Other Dockets:

Northern District of Oklahoma 4:99-cv-00660

Available Documents:

Any published opinion

Complaint (any)

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed

Relief Granted:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Content of Injunction:

Discrimination Prohibition

Implement complaint/dispute resolution process

Recordkeeping

Issues

General/Misc.:

Funding

Record-keeping

Discrimination Area:

Sports

Discrimination Basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Sex/Gender(s):

Female

Recommended Citation