MURRAY – A former Murray Middle School teacher filed a lawsuit against the Murray Board of Education last week in United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, asserting claims that her termination was the result of sex discrimination, associational disability discrimination and retaliation for invoking her rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).
Lindsay Koebbe, represented by Kelly Mulloy Myers, an attorney with Freking Myers & Reul LLC in Cincinnati, Ohio, filed the lawsuit on July 22. The case falls under the jurisdiction of the federal court system because the complaint alleges violations of federal law.
School board attorney William “Chip” Adams, III, informed The Sentinel that the district received notice of the lawsuit around 10 a.m. yesterday and further advised that the district does not comment on pending litigation.
According to the complaint, Koebbe was hired by the Murray Independent School District (MISD) as a fourth-grade science teacher in August 2020. From that time until her termination at the end of the 2023-24 school year, she received “commendations for her excellent performance,” such as winning teaching awards and receiving grants. Furthermore, she was never written-up or otherwise formally disciplined during that time and, in her most recent performance evaluation, was rated “excellent.”
In May 2024, Aaron Irvin attended the board’s monthly meeting to speak about Koebbe’s dismissal during the public comment portion of the meeting. Two people signed up to speak that night – Irvin and a community member who spoke against the demotion of long-time MMS Band Director Beth Stribling.
Before opening the floor to public comment, Adams informed those in attendance of the board’s policies and procedures related to public comments at board meetings. Then, anticipating personnel decisions would be a subject of concern, Adams said, “It must be noted that, since the adoption of the Kentucky Education Reform Act in 1990 by the Kentucky legislature, ‘a’ board of education – not just Murray, but anywhere else – has no ability make personnel decisions, save and except the selection of the superintendent and the board attorney.”
Irvin was called first, but he withdrew his request to speak. “I apologize,” he said. “My understanding, based on the policies and procedures manual, was that the board and the superintendent, in particular, did have some say over hiring procedures in the district.”
After the meeting, Irvin told The Sentinel that he had hoped to bring the board’s attention to Koebbe’s numerous accolades and, as the father of a child with special needs, to share his family’s personal experiences with her over multiple years through MMS’ special education program.
“Having a student in that situation, that’s always something that you’re deeply concerned with and knowing that a teacher is there in the classroom, that you know has that experience, that you know has that advocacy, that you know is going to stand up and be there for your student is incredible,” Irvin said. “And so, seeing her just being terminated without really any explanation, knowing that she is beyond qualified, again, demonstrably, this outstanding teacher, it doesn’t make a lot of sense. That was something I was hoping to raise and, hopefully, have the board look into, have the superintendent, maybe, raise some questions about, but unfortunately, from the sound of it, it’s out of their hands as well.”
According to the complaint, Koebbe’s issues with MMS administrators began in 2022 when she was diagnosed with an unspecified medical condition. When she disclosed her diagnosis to Bob Horne, MMS’ principal at the time, “he recoiled and behaved as though [Koebbe] was contagious” and mocked her condition. The filing describes Horne as favoring male employees, “particularly those perceived as ‘tough,’” and notes a proclivity for reprimanding female employees, including Koebbe, for doing things that their male counterparts were free to do without fear of discourse, such as standing on a chair to hang something on the wall.
Tensions between Koebbe and administrators escalated in 2023, when she voiced concerns about the efficacy of MMS’ special education program, drawing on the experiences of her own child who developed severe anxiety and vocal tics after being enrolled in the program. The complaint notes an occasion when current MMS Principal, then-Assistant Principal, Shelley Stubblefield “yelled at Plaintiff’s child to ‘stop’ his tic, even though he had no control over it.”
In March 2024, Koebbe informed administrators that, on the recommendation of her child’s pediatrician, she needed to take FMLA leave to care for her child. According to the complaint, Horne suggested that Koebbe should be a “stay-at-home mother.” To that end, the complaint further asserts that Koebbe was not the only female employee who received such treatment when taking leave to care for family members.
While on FMLA leave, another teacher was moved into Koebbe’s position, and despite the fact that Koebbe was previously informed that she would remain employed for the next school year, she was terminated. At the time of her termination, there was an open position for a language arts teacher, a position for which Koebbe was qualified, but administrators chose to hire a new teacher who had just graduated to fill the position.
Counts I and II of the complaint claim that Koebbe was discriminated against on the basis of her sex. Count I invokes violations of federal law, namely Title VII, while Count II concerns violations of state law.
In support of the sex discrimination claims, the complaint contends that Koebbe and other female employees were often chastised for conduct in which their male counterparts regularly engaged; that administrators failed to reprimand male employees for the same behaviors female employees were punished for carrying out; that Horne openly praised and expressed a preference for male employees, particularly those of large stature; that after Koebbe requested taking FMLA leave, Horne suggested that she was “better suited” for staying home to care for her child than continuing her employment with MISD; and that Koebbe had received assurances that her contract would be extended for the next school year but was nonetheless terminated while on FMLA leave.
Count III claims MISD violated the “association” provision of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which protects employees from discrimination based on their relationship to an individual with a disability, regardless of the employee’s disability status. The complaint argues that Koebbe’s child, who was enrolled in MMS’ special education program, has a protected disability and that she took FMLA leave to care for that child, concluding that Koebbe was terminated on account of her disability, whether real or perceived, and/or because of her association with her disabled child, both of which are violations of the ADA.
Finally, Count IV asserts violations of the FMLA. Koebbe was eligible for FMLA leave because she had worked for MISD, an employer with 50 or more employees, for at least 12 months, and she worked at least 1,250 hours in the previous 12-month period; therefore, she was entitled to take FMLA leave for her child’s medical condition. The complaint characterizes MISD’s decision to terminate Koebbe’s contract while she was on FMLA-approved leave as an unlawful act of retaliation against her for exercising her rights under the FMLA.
Koebbe has asked the court to enjoin MISD from further discriminatory and retaliatory conduct as described in the complaint and to either reinstate her contract or award her front pay. In addition, she is seeking recovery of all lost earnings and benefits, compensatory damages for emotional distress, liquidated damages, punitive damages, reimbursement of court costs and attorneys’ fees and that she be compensated for any adverse tax consequences that may result from her receiving a lump sum award instead of receiving regular paychecks across separate tax years.
MISD now has 21 days to file its answer to the complaint.
Filings in civil lawsuits only reflect one party’s interpretation of events.
