P.P.
P.P. v. Compton Unified School District
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Fitzgerald, J.
Proceedings (In Chambers): ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNC- ' TION [42] '
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction (the “Motion”). (Docket No. 42). The Court has read and considered the papers filed on the Motion, and held a hearing on August 20, 2015. As set forth below, the Motion is DENIED. Plaintiffs have not demonstrated that the law and facts clearly favor the mandatory injunction sought in the Motion. ' In the absence of class certification, the evidence presented as to each named Plaintiff does not clearly support a claim of trauma-induced disability that woúld satisfy a reasonable expert in the field.
I. BACKGROUND
On May 18, 2015, students Peter P. (by Carolina Melendrez, guardian ad litem), Kimberly Cervantes, Phillip W. (by Beatrice W., guardian ad litem), Virgil W. (by Beatrice W., guardian ad litem), Donte J. (by Lavinia J., guardian ad litem) (the “Student Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, along with teachers Rodney Curry, Armando Castro, II, and Maureen McCoy (the “Teacher Plaintiffs”)' (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) initiated the present suit by filing a Complaint. (Docket No.…