CoronavirusFt. Wayne MarketLocal News

Lawsuit against NACS over masks, quarantines allowed to proceed

FORT WAYNE, Ind. (WOWO): An Allen Superior Court judge has ruled that a lawsuit filed against Northwest Allen County Schools, the Allen County Health Department, and Health Commissioner Dr. Matthew Sutter can move forward.

District and county health officials argued that the lawsuit – filed by six parents of NACS students – complains about “reasonable policies” meant to protect children from COVID-19 and wanted the lawsuit dismissed.

Mitchell Litigation and Advocacy, representing the parents, argues that “the restrictions imposed on K-12 students, including contact tracing and quarantines of healthy kids,” is based on “unlawful mandates from state and local officials.”

RELATED: NACS drops mask mandate

Judge David Avery denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss yesterday. Read the full court order below.

2022.01.12 Order on Motions to Dismiss by Saige Driver on Scribd

Related posts

How will you spend Father’s Day?

Brooklyne Beatty

Fort Wayne police find man dead in truck

Saige Driver

Sweetwater plans major expansion, 1,000+ new jobs

Brooklyne Beatty


LOS January 13, 2022 at 8:33 am

It’s the governors fault, He granted unelected medical tyrants power that they don’t have. Stop voting for corporate puppets who are hungry for federal dollars.

Tyler A. January 13, 2022 at 10:16 am

The headline is misleading – Count 3 pertaining to masks was dismissed. The counts moving forward deal with quarantining procedures almost exclusively.

Trevor Anderson January 13, 2022 at 10:43 am

If this whole thing is about masks, the plaintiffs just lost. Count 3 (masks) is dismissed and not considered a violation of constitutional rights.

To be clear... January 13, 2022 at 12:50 pm

Anyone that States they lost count 3 which = means its constitutional is either a liar, didnt read it, or cant comprehend it. “The courts does not address the Countys contention…..are vested with the authority for mandatory masking”

All the ruling means is they didnt provide suffient facts.

And this is only in regards to Indiana Constitution…so don’t Broad-brush this to US Constitution

Tyler A. January 13, 2022 at 3:15 pm

“Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Count 3, alleging that the School Defendants’ policy of requiring that students wear masks while attending classes and other school activities violates Article 1, Section 12 of the Indiana Constitution because it unconstitutionally impinges on the students’ right to refuse medical treatment, fails to state claim for which relief may be granted and therefore Count 3 should be dismissed
as to the School Defendants.”
No broad-brushing happening, you’re trying to put words in my mouth that were never stated. I said constitutional rights… The Indiana Constitution is still a constitution, is it not?
So either: the lawyer didn’t do a good job, or case law has proven that mask mandates are not unconstitutional (in Indiana) – or both.

Dialogue is good January 14, 2022 at 9:24 am

You are both “Tyler A.” and “Trever Anderson”…? Just an observation.

I’m not putting words in your mouth…ever play the “telephone game”…You didn’t write “Indiana Constitution” in your initial post…just putting a stop to it before morphs.

“Failing to state a claim for relief” does not equal “Proven not unconstitutional”. The case must be heard and ruled to be “proven”.

LOS January 13, 2022 at 1:05 pm

So might want to do some reading, not just about masks


Leave a Comment