Doe v. Cumberland Valley School District et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JANE DOE, individually and as parent
and natural guardian of John Doe 1 and
John Doe 2, minors,
Plaintiff,
v.
CUMBERLAND VALLEY SCHOOL
DISTRICT, et al.,
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Civil No. 1:25-CV-00158
Judge Jennifer P. Wilson
ORDER
AND NOW, on this 5 th day of January, 2026, in accordance with the
accompanying memorandum of law, IT IS ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:
1) The motion to dismiss filed by Defendants Cumberland Valley School
District (“CVSD”), Dr. Mark A. Blanchard (“Blanchard”), Dr. Jesse
Rawls, (“Rawls”), Greg Rausch (“Rausch”), Harold “Bud” Shaffner
(“Shaffner”), and Timothy Froelich (“Froelich”) (collectively,
“Defendants”) will be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN
PART as follows:
a. 	Count I of the amended complaint is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE as to Blanchard, Rawls, Rausch, and Shaffner.
The demand for punitive and emotional distress damages
alleged in Count I is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
b. Count II of the amended complaint against Blanchard, Rawls,
Rausch, and Shaffner in their official capacities is DISMISSED
WITH PREJUDICE. Count II’s claim for punitive damages
against CVSD is also DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Case 1:25-cv-00158-JPW Document 41 Filed 01/05/26 Page 1 of 2

c. 	Counts III through VII of the amended complaint against
CVSD are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
d. Count VI of the amended complaint against Rawls is
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
e. 	Count VII of the amended complaint against all Defendants is
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
f. 	Count VI of the amended complaint against Blanchard,
Shaffner, and Rausch is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
g. Thus, the counts remaining in the amended complaint are as
follows: Count I against CVSD; Count II against Blanchard,
Rawls, Rausch, and Shaffner in their individual capacities and
against CVSD; and Counts III, IV, V, and VI against Froelich.
2) Defendants’ motion to strike is GRANTED IN PART AND
DENIED IN PART. Specifically, the court STRIKES paragraphs
49, 50, 52, 59(e) n.2, 62, 63, and 64 from the amended complaint.
3) Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint consistent with this order by
January 27, 2026.
4) If Plaintiffs do not file an amended complaint by the above deadline,
Defendants are directed to respond to the second amended complaint
in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
s/Jennifer P. Wilson
JENNIFER P. WILSON
United States District Court Judge
Middle District of Pennsylvania
Case 1:25-cv-00158-JPW Document 41 Filed 01/05/26 Page 2 of 2