As state and federal legal cases for families of the Oxford High School shooting victims continue to drag on for another year, a new lawsuit has been filed by a former teacher.
Molly Darnell, a former educational coordinator at the high school, filed a lawsuit on Nov. 26, four days before the third anniversary of the shooting that killed four students and injured seven others.
According to the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan against the Oxford school district and five former school officials, Darnell has suffered “irreparable harm” and that school officials “escalated the danger by releasing the shooter back into the school population from a place of safety and security”.
The suit named former Oxford employees Nicholas Ejak, Shawn Hopkins, Steven Wolf, Timothy Throne and unidentified school officials referred to collectively as “the Oxford defendants.”
According to the lawsuit, due to the actions of school staff and administrators, Darnell has suffered “terror, shock, excruciating pain, fear, trauma, severe emotional distress, scarring and disfigurement, wage loss, loss of earning capacity, and will incur future damages, including requiring ongoing mental health counseling.”
Throughout the filing by attorney Matthew Turner, it claims several employees did not properly do their jobs, tried to minimize the threat posed by the shooter and enabled him to stay in the building rather than be removed on the day of the shooting.
“Hopkins and Ejak misused their authority by sending the shooter back through the
school to his third period class, alone, and with his unsearched backpack containing his
handgun and ammunition,” the lawsuit said. (They) used their authority to return the shooter to the classroom, causing a departure from the status quo, and thus creating and/or exacerbating a risk of violence that had not existed or was lower when the shooter was safely secured in the counseling office.”
Darnell, who was shot during the incident and testified at hearings for the shooter prior to a guilty plea, has been with the district since 1998. She is suing on the basis of irreparable physical and psychological harm and is seeking undisclosed damages.
A RARE VICTORY
Also in November, Oakland County Circuit Court Judge Jacob Cunningham ruled that each shooting victim and gunshot in the Nov. 30, 2021 incident should be considered a separate incident, possibly leading to a $55 million total payout.
The insurance company for Oxford schools, MASB-SEG Property and Casualty Pool Inc., claimed damages from the shooting to be paid to victims should be capped at $5 million viewing the entire event as a single incident.
“The ruling means that Judge Cunnigham agrees with Oxford community schools and the victims’ families that each one of these kids have separate occurrences, so $55 million is at stake, instead of $5 million,” said Ven Johnson, the attorney representing several Oxford families in both state and federal lawsuits.
The district filed the lawsuit back in January arguing the insurance company’s interpretation of the policy was inaccurate.
“Now that the court has ruled that the insurance policy limits are $55 million, the insurance company obviously has much more to lose than they initially expected,” Johnson later said in a statement on the ruling. “No amount of money could fully compensate these victims for their horrible losses, but at least the families would feel that some justice has finally been obtained against the school district, which played a significant role in its failure to prevent the shooting.”
MASB-SEG is expected to appeal Cunningham’s decision.
NESSEL RESPONDS
Families of the victims and the Oxford school board again called for an independent investigation into the events leading up to and during the shooting, which garnered a response from Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel.
In August, the school board passed a resolution asking for a state-funded review of how emergency responders and the district responded on the day of the shooting.
Nessel responded after the families held a press conference in early November saying her office is more than willing to move forward with an investigation.
“While my department has renewed the terms of what a proper investigation would require, we have never withdrawn that offer,” said Nessel. “It was our hope that an additional review could provide many of the answers that the families are still seeking today.”
But her offer came with several conditions that need to be met before she can initiate any investigation.
She said the Oakland County Prosecutors Office would need to turn over all evidence, testimony, documents and transcripts involved with the prosecution of all members of the Crumbley family.
Ethan Crumbley, the shooter, was sentenced to life in prison without parole on four counts of first-degree murder and one count of terrorism causing death.
Jennifer and James Crumbley, his parents, were each sentenced to 10 to 15 years in prison after being convicted of manslaughter in February 2024.
Nessel said the Oxford school board would have to waive attorney-client privilege and would need willing participation of witnesses, including those who declined to be a part of the Guidepost Solutions investigation.
The Guidepost report on their investigation was released in August 2023. The report detailed the events leading up to the tragedy, areas where the district was deficient in their prevention of the shooting and recommendations for future security upgrades at the school, but dozens of staff and administrators refused to participate in the investigation.
She said she would also need access to members of law enforcement and the prosecutors office, as well as approval and appropriation of funds from the state legislature for the investigation.
“We would need the cooperation of the Oakland County Sheriff (Mike Bouchard) and the Oakland County Prosecutor (Karen McDonald), as well as local law enforcement and be able to interview all of their relevant staff in order to evaluate their response and their investigation and prosecution,” Nessel said.
Since the Nov. 18 announcement by the Attorney General, there have been no announcements on if any of the conditions will be met, but McDonald said her office is willing to work with Nessel.
“We are not aware of any action needed by my office to activate the Attorney General’s authority, but we will do everything possible to enable such an investigation,” McDonald said in a statement. “And my office will fully cooperate with any such investigation.”
MOTHER SEEKS TO OVERTURN CONVICTION
On Dec. 2, attorney Michael Dezsi filed a motion on behalf of Jennifer Crumbley in Oakland County Circuit Court to have her conviction overturned eight months after she and her husband James were sentenced to 10 to 15 years in prison after being convicted of manslaughter.
Dezsi, who was appointed as Crumbley’s attorney two weeks after sentencing, said the entire process was tainted and her defense team was not made aware of cooperation agreements made by the Oakland County Prosecutor’s Office for two key witnesses in the case.
“Jennifer Crumbley’s convictions for involuntary manslaughter stem from a trial riddled with legal errors where key evidence was withheld, and cooperation agreements were peddled and suppressed to secure testimony for the prosecution to convict an individual who committed no crime,” Dezsi said in a statement. “There’s a reason why no parent in America has ever been held responsible for the criminal acts of their child in relation to a school shooting. It is because Mrs. Crumbley committed no crime. This case should be concerning for parents everywhere.”
Dezsi claims cooperation agreements with Nicholas Ejak and Shawn Hopkins were not disclosed, denying Crumbley the right to a free trial.
“Apart from the improper decision to charge, Mrs. Crumbley was denied a fair trial where the prosecution deliberately withheld from the defense key impeachment evidence and proceeded on Kafkaesque inconsistent legal theories that work a grave injustice on the law,” Dezi wrote in the motion.
Chief Assistant David Williams responded to the claims.
“No witnesses were given anything for their testimony, and there was no immunity – these witnesses testified without any promises or protection whatsoever,” Williams said in a statement. “The Michigan Court of Appeals has already reviewed the legal issues raised by Jennifer Crumbley and rejected them.”
According to court records, Judge Cheryl Matthews will hold a hearing on the motion at 8:30 a.m. on Jan 8, 2025.
MICHIGAN SUPREME COURT UP NEXT
In September the Michigan Court of Appeals dealt families suing Oxford school employees another setback.
On Sept. 6, the appeals court panel heard from attorney Christopher Desmond, who represents the victims’ families. He argued Oakland County Circuit Judge Mary Ellen Brennan was wrong in a March 2023 ruling that the shooter was the cause of the students’ injuries thereby absolving Oxford employees of any culpability.
The court ruling explained why Desmond’s argument was not the case.
“Ultimately, plaintiffs have not identified any evidence that would support their claim the individual Oxford defendants were the proximate cause of plaintiffs’ injuries instead of E.C. (Ethan Crumbley),” the appeals court wrote in its ruling.
Brennan dismissed civil lawsuits against the school district and employees ruling they were entitled to governmental immunity.
Under Michigan law, government agencies and their employees are generally not liable for their negligent acts, if those acts were performed within the scope of their governmental function or employment.
Desmond also argued that all evidence was not available in discovery as the investigation had yet to be completed and considered by the trial court before dismissing the case.
“Regardless of what the individual Oxford defendants did or did not do, E.C. still made the definite and premeditated decision to commit the school shooting, and no amount of additional discovery can change that fact,” the appeals court wrote. “As a result, summary disposition was properly granted despite all of the discovery not yet being provided to the trial court.”
Desmond said the decision was not unexpected and is ready to appeal the decision to the Michigan Supreme Court.
“I am disappointed by the decision at the court of appeals, but I think we knew ultimately this was a case that was going to end up in the hands of the Michigan Supreme Court in one fashion or another,” said Desmond. “Whoever lost at the court of appeals was surely going to be filing an application to that court and asking them to review this case.”
Desmond and his team have already submitted their briefs asking the Michigan Supreme Court to hear the case. After response briefs, the court will then decide whether to hear the case possibly before the end of the year.