On September 23rd, 2025, Kennedy Hunt P.C. filed a complaint against the Ladue School District and the Special School District of St. Louis County for alleged disability and gender discrimination and retaliation in violation of the Missouri Human Rights Act.
At the time of the allegations, one of our clients, L.W., was a minor child with disabilities, including Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Asperger’s Syndrome, and anxiety. The lawsuit alleges that, though the school district concluded L.W. was eligible for reasonable accommodations, the school failed to provide them to L.W. Our other client is L.W.’s sister, L.B.W,, who is a minor female child.
Per the lawsuit:
[L.W.]’s math teacher discarded the note card that he had brought for an assessment, despite having previously agreed to provide the reasonable accommodation of a note card for steps, procedures, and formulas.
The lawsuit alleges that in April 2024, one of our clients’ classmates (C.G.) messaged our other client, a minor female at Ladue (L.B.W.), asking if she wanted to see his print. Without her consent, C.G. sent another social media picture and begged her to open the picture. L.B.W. opened at least one picture and noticed it was a picture of C.G. in his underwear, so that L.B.W. could see an outline of his genitals. That evening, That evening, L.B.W. informed our client and Parents that C.G. sent her pornographic pictures. L.W. then confronted C.G., and the altercation became physical.
As a result of the incident that occurred on April 8, 2024, Ladue suspended L.W. and allegedly did not provide him with any accommodation while out of school. The school allegedly did not suspend C.G., despite being aware that C.G. had transmitted inappropriate or pornographic images to L.B.W.
At his disciplinary hearing, L.W. notified the school that C.G. directly messaged L.B.W. through social media on September 6, 2024, and violently threatened to damage our client’s vehicle, threatened to break “every bone” in our client’s “body,” and threatened “my cousins begged me to let them shoot u” or a plot to shoot our client.
The lawsuit claims:
Despite Ladue receiving both verbal and written notifications that C.G. violently threatened [our client] with physical violence, including a scheme to shoot him, Ladue failed to take any action to investigate the matter or to protect [our client], who has a disability.
After this disciplinary hearing, Ladue extended our client’s suspension to 180 days. According to the lawsuit, the district initially placed our client in virtual school despite knowing he could not access virtual education due to his disabilities.
The lawsuit alleges:
Parents informed Ladue that [our client] was not receiving his reasonable accommodation and that he was unable to learn online due to his disabilities. Instead of accommodating [our client], Ladue threatened to expel [our client] in May 2024, over “new allegations” by another Ladue female student. Ladue informed our clients that it would withdraw its attempt to expel [him] if [the family] dropped their legitimate disciplinary appeal to the Ladue School Board for the 180-day suspension.
Our client was able to return to school on September 3, 2024, if he signed a Student “Safety” Plan before returning to school. The lawsuit alleges the plan maligned our client’s character, including information from the alleged “new allegations” that Ladue initially used to potentially expel our client.
The lawsuit claims:
[Our client]’s Student “Safety” Plan was retaliatory because the Ladue School Board, Policies, and Student Handbook did not require it for [our client]’s return to school, Ladue School Board Policies and Student Handbook did not require this for [our client]’s return to school and because [our client]’s Student “Safety Plan did not indicate C.G.’s violent threats toward [our client] or that the alleged new allegations Ladue dropped.
The lawsuit also alleges Ladue refused to provide our client with any of the previously agreed-upon reasonable accommodations upon his return to in-person learning. The lawsuit also claims the school did not take measures to protect L.W. from C.G. or investigate his actions.
According to the lawsuit, in August 2024, our client’s sister started at Ladue High School, where C.G. is also a student. The lawsuit claims that when she started high school, Ladue never took any measures to safeguard L.B.W. from C.G. or investigate his actions.
According to the lawsuit:
Instead of concentrating on C.G. and his inappropriate conduct, on August 29, 2024, Ladue informed L.B.W. that she was required to sign a Student “Safety” Plan to regain access to the educational institution. The Student “Safety” Plan for L.B.W. indicated, in part, that it was the “result of a report of inappropriate communications by another student toward [L.B.W.]”
The lawsuit claims that L.B.W. objected and did not sign the plan because it did not accurately state C.G.’s actions, it did not accurately portray L.B.W. as the victim of C.G.’s actions, because it felt retaliatory, and because the Ladue School Board, Ladue Board Policies, or the Ladue Student Handbook did not require this. Ladue let L.B.W. come back to school, but Ladue allegedly still implemented the plans by distributing them to all their Ladue teachers. The lawsuit states that our clients experienced humiliation and embarrassment due to the disseminating of inaccurate plans and felt ashamed multiple times because of Ladue’s actions.
This case is ongoing.
For more information, contact attorney Michelle Faron at michelle@kennedyhuntlaw.com. If you or someone you know has been a victim of disability discrimination, our skilled attorneys at Kennedy Hunt, P.C. may be able to help you. Fill out a questionnaire so we can understand your claim.