Case: 24-10189 Document: 73-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2025

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

____________ FILED September 9, 2025 No. 24-10189 Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk Jason Sims, Individually and as representative of the Estate of Sharla Sims (deceased); Brandren Sims, Plaintiffs—Appellants, versus Dallas Independent School District, Defendant—Appellee. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:23-CV-10 ______________________________ Before Higginson, Willett, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam: * Underlying this case is great tragedy—the death of a special education teaching assistant stemming from injuries she suffered in an attack by a stu- dent in January 2021. Plaintiffs, survivors of the deceased Sharla Sims, as- serted 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against Dallas Independent School District.

Plaintiffs allege the school district violated Sims’ substantive due process _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

Case: 24-10189 Document: 73-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/09/2025

No. 24-10189

rights by affirmatively acting to create or enhance a danger to her physical safety. The district court dismissed plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint because plaintiffs had not plausibly alleged the school district’s liability under Monell v. Department of Social Services of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 691 (1978).

The court has carefully reviewed the briefs, record, applicable law, and oral argument. Having done so, the court AFFIRMS the district court’s dismis- sal of plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint.

Plaintiffs argue that—three months before the fatal incident—the dis- trict’s Admission, Review, and Dismissal Committee (ARD Committee) de- clined to move the student out of his classroom placement with Sims, even though he had attacked her and others in September 2020. And they allege the ARD Committee made this decision (1) knowing that the student had punched and kicked teachers, including Sims, before; and (2) following an official school district policy that did not permit the ARD Committee to change the student’s placement under these circumstances.

As the district court identified, plaintiffs have failed to plausibly allege defendant’s official policy was the moving force behind the alleged constitu- tional violation. See Langiano v. City of Fort Worth, 131 F.4th 285, 294 (5th Cir. 2025) (outlining municipal liability standard). Specifically, plaintiffs failed to allege the official policy was facially unconstitutional or promulgated by the school board with deliberate indifference. See Edwards v. City of Balch Springs, 70 F.4th 302, 307–08 (5th Cir. 2023) (explaining moving force ele- ment requires that policy itself is unconstitutional or promulgated with “de- liberate indifference” to “known or obvious fact that a specific constitutional violation would follow” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).

Plaintiffs likewise failed to allege the school district knowingly ratified the ARD Committee’s allegedly unconstitutional decision—or any other con- duct—by readopting the same policy after Sims’ death. See Allen v. Hays, 65 F.4th 736, 749 (5th Cir. 2023) (ratification theory of municipal liability

Case: 24-10189 Document: 73-1 Page: 3 Date Filed: 09/09/2025

No. 24-10189

applies where “the policymaker approves a subordinate’s decision and the basis for it”). On plaintiffs’ allegations, Dallas Independent School District could not be liable for any underlying constitutional violation.

AFFIRMED.