NOTE: An earlier version of this story mischaracterized the motion to dismiss as seeking to dismiss the entire lawsuit. It only seeks to dismiss Counts II-V.
The Española school district is seeking to dismiss aspects of a lawsuit filed by the family of a former football and basketball player.
Ruben Archuleta, a member of the school board, along with his wife, filed a lawsuit in June on behalf of his high-school son, Luke. Named as defendants in the lawsuit are head Española Valley basketball coach Joey Trujillo, assistant coach Filiberto Dominguez, athletic director Matthew Abeyta, former high school principal Michael Chavez, superintendent Holly Martinez and the board of education.
Archuleta had been a junior varsity and varsity player during the 2021-22 season as a sophomore, and he played on the football team in fall 2022 as a junior. He was cut from the team in advance of the 2022-23 season, and subsequently transferred to Los Alamos where he played for the varsity basketball team and is currently on the football team.
The main allegation in the complaint comes from a summer basketball camp, where allegedly Dominguez “forcefully poked Luke in the head to the point his head snapped back.” They claimed that his playing time was limited after that incident, and alleged further bullying from the coaching staff.
In a phone call with the Rio Grande Sun, Ramon Soto, attorney for the Archuleta family, said that the student-athlete did not have a chance for a fair hearing, and that the school did not follow policies and procedures. He said they are seeking accountability from the district so that similar situations do not happen to other students.
The school is represented by Alexander Tucker of Albuquerque-based Brunette & Associates. On Sept. 8, they filed a 31-page motion to dismiss five of the six counts in the lawsuit. They are not seeking to dismiss the first aspect, which involves the licensure of coaching staff.
As a motion to dismiss, the attorneys do not introduce new facts but instead argue that the facts as presented in the complaint do not meet criteria for damages. The attorneys argued that the allegations did not meet a standard by which the student’s constitutional rights were violated.
They wrote that an alleged instance in which Dominguez poked the athlete in the forehead, it was not excessive force “shocking to the conscience.” Essentially, they argue that the force used in the alleged poke is not enough to warrant damages in a lawsuit.
In being cut from the roster, the attorneys wrote that, “The New Mexico Constitution does not grant students a property or liberty interest in a roster spot on an extracurricular sports team, let alone the extracurricular team of their choice.” Additionally, the player was able to continue playing basketball, but on a different team, and they argue that he was not “forced” to transfer as the complaint alleges.
“It is noteworthy that due process, in the context of selecting high school sports teams, is already accounted for in the inherent premise of a ‘tryout’ — which Luke had,” they wrote.
Cutting to what seems to believe the heart of the matter, the attorneys also wrote, referencing an article from The Washington Post, that, “Parental attempts to influence coaching decisions (and corresponding lawsuits when those efforts fail) have become more frequent in recent years.”
Four days later, attorneys for Archuleta filed a response to the motion. They filed a 15-page response, in addition to a request for a hearing with Judge Jason Linyard.
The Archuleta family is represented in the case by Ramón Soto of The Soto Law Office.
Soto wrote in response that Luke was subjected to “bullying, including assault and battery” and suffered from medical issues as a result.
Their response claims that Archuleta’s rights were violated under the New Mexico Civil Rights Act regardless of other claims by the school district’s attorneys. Soto said in a phone call that New Mexico provides greater protections for “excessive force” than what the school’s attorneys claimed.
The response argues that students and basketball players do indeed have “a right to adequate due process as a varsity player at EVHS.” They referenced a court case that “found that adverse actions against student athletes may rise to the level of a federal constitution violation.”
For many of the claims, the defendants’ attorneys find court cases that seem to show a lower standard than those referenced in the motion to dismiss.
The plaintiffs did agree to drop some of the counts in the complaint, including a charge of assault and battery against Dominguez.