Lisa M. Bardsley, et al. v. Narraguagus Jr./Sr. High School, et al.

• Court: District Court, D. Maine
• Decided: November 5, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-00343
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF MAINE

LISA M. BARDSLEY, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs ) ) v. ) No. 1:25-cv-00343-LEW ) NARRAGUAGUS JR./SR. HIGH ) SCHOOL, et al., ) ) Defendants )

ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On October 7, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Karen Frink Wolf filed with the Court, with copies to the parties presently appearing, her Recommended Decision (ECF No. 18) on Defendant Narraguagus Jr./Sr. High School’s Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (ECF No. 16). The matter is now before the Court on the Recommended Decision; Plaintiffs’ Motions to Address the Court (ECF Nos. 17, 20), Objection (ECF No. 21), and Reply (ECF No. 23); and the School’s Response to the Objection (ECF No. 22). I have reviewed the foregoing materials, together with the pleadings and record, and based on that review I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Recommended Decision. I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in the Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. In particular, it is manifest from the pleadings and the record that if Plaintiffs believe that litigation is necessary for Landon Robert Bardsley Floran to receive a free appropriate public education (“FAPE”), then they should file a complaint with the Maine Department of Education and request an administrative due process hearing. Furthermore, even if the proper Plaintiff in this case (i.e., Landon) pursued the Americans with Disabilities Act claim on his own behalf, since he cannot do so acting through his mother as Plaintiff, the allegations at most allege the denial of FAPE, but not the denial of FAPE based on facts that plausibly depict disability-based animus. See D.B. ex rel. Elizabeth B. v. Esposito, 675 F.3d 26, 40 (1st Cir. 2012).

The Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED (ECF No. 18); Plaintiffs’ Motions to Address the Court are MOOTED (ECF Nos. 17 and 20) (though the Court has reviewed them); and Plaintiffs’ Objections are OVERRULED, as they fail to overcome the grounds for dismissal. Defendant Narraguagus Jr./Sr. High School’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED (ECF No. 16) and the School is HEREBY DISMISSED. Additionally, the remaining Defendants (President Donald Trump and the State of Maine) are likewise DISMISSED, sua sponte, because the Complaint fails to state a claim for which relief may be granted. SO ORDERED.

Dated this 5th day of November, 2025.

/s/ Lance E. Walker Chief U.S. District Judge