ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Jan 12 4:01 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP2600193
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
COUNTY OF HORRY
Docket No.: 2023CP26______
John Doe, individually and in his capacity as
parent and legal guardian of Jane Doe, a minor
child under the age of eighteen, and Jane Doe, SUMMONS
individually.
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Horry County Schools a/k/a Horry County
School District a/k/a School District of Horry
County and Ocean Bay Elementary School
a/k/a Ocean Bay Elementary.
Defendants.
TO: DEFENDANTS ABOVE NAMED
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to answer the complaint herein, a copy
of which is herewith served upon you, and to serve a copy of your answer to this complaint upon
the subscriber, at the address shown below, within thirty (30) days after service hereof, exclusive
of the day of such service, and if you fail to answer the complaint, judgment by default will be
rendered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.
s/Tiffany K. Buffkin
Ian D. Maguire (SC Bar 66587)
Tiffany K. Buffkin (SC Bar 104090)
MAGUIRE LAW FIRM
1600 North Oak Street, Suite B
Myrtle Beach, South Carolina 29577
Telephone: (843) 361-7549
Facsimile: (843) 361-7048
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
Dated: January 12, 2023
Page 1
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Jan 12 4:01 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP2600193
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
COUNTY OF HORRY
Docket No.: 2023CP26______
John Doe, individually and in his capacity as
parent and legal guardian of Jane Doe, a minor
child under the age of eighteen, and Jane Doe, COMPLAINT
individually,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Horry County Schools a/k/a Horry County
School District a/k/a School District of Horry
County and Ocean Bay Elementary School
a/k/a Ocean Bay Elementary,
Defendants.
TO: DEFENDANTS ABOVE NAMED
Plaintiff John Doe, as parent and legal guardians of Jane Doe, a minor child, by and through
their undersigned counsel, complaining of the above-named Defendants, would respectfully show
to this Honorable Court as follows:
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiffs were citizens and residents of Horry County,
South Carolina.
2. Defendant Horry County Schools a/k/a Horry County School District a/k/a School
District of Horry County (hereinafter referred to as “HCSD”) is a public school system owned and
operated by the State of South Carolina. Horry County Schools operates the various school
buildings within Horry County, including Ocean Bay Elementary School, and controls the
education and supervision of minor children in Horry County, and employs staff to include
educators and special education teachers for minor children in Horry County, South Carolina.
Horry County Schools is a governmental agency within the meaning of the South Carolina Tort
Page 2
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Jan 12 4:01 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP2600193
Claims Act and is organized and existing under the laws of the State of South Carolina.
3. Defendant Ocean Bay Elementary School a/k/a Ocean Bay Elementary (hereinafter
referred to as “Ocean Bay”) is an elementary school operating within the Horry County School
District. Defendant Ocean Bay Elementary School operates the facility located at or near 950
International Drive in Myrtle Beach South Carolina, controls the education and supervision of
minor children within this location, and employs staff to include educators and special education
teachers for minor children at this location. Defendant Ocean Bay Elementary School is a
governmental agency within the meaning of the South Carolina Torts Claim Act and is organized
and exiting under the laws of the State of South Carolina.
4. Upon information and belief, at all times relevant hereto, Grace McColgan was a
special education teacher and acted as an employee, agent, and/or legal representative of Defendant
HCSD and Defendant Ocean Bay, and her acts and omissions complained of herein occurred in
the course and scope of her employment with Defendants.
5. Upon information and belief, at all times relevant hereto, Rebecca Schroyer was
the Principal at Ocean Bay Elementary School and acted as an employee, agent, and/or legal
representative of Defendant HCSD and Defendant Ocean Bay, and her acts and omissions
complained of herein occurred in the course and scope of her employment with HCSD.
6. That this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims and causes of action
herein under Article V §11 of the South Carolina Constitution, S.C. Code Ann. § 14-5-350, and
S.C. Code Ann. § 15-78-100.
7. That this Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants in this matter.
8. That venue is proper in Horry County under S.C. Code Ann. § 15-78-100 and S.C.
Code Ann. § 15-7-10 et seq. because the acts and omissions complained of herein occurred in
Page 3
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Jan 12 4:01 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP2600193
Horry County.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
9. The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are hereby incorporated and alleged as
if fully set forth herein.
10. That Jane Doe is a non-verbal special needs student who attended Ocean Bay
Elementary School from August 2021-May 2022. Grace McColgan was Jane Doe’s assigned
teacher for the 2021-2022 school year.
11. Within months of being placed in Grace McColgan’s custody and care, Jane Doe
began behaving in a manner inconsistent with her typical behavioral pattern and began exhibiting
signs of severe emotional stress, resulting in physical outbursts.
12. That around October 20th, 2022, John Doe was informed by an outside investigator
that on or around February 1, 2022, Grace McColgan was caught on video punching Jane Doe.
13. Upon information and belief, this incident was reported to Principal Rebecca
Schroyer, who failed to inform Jane Doe’s parents and failed to take any action to prevent further
injuries to Jane Doe.
14. Upon information and belief, despite Principal Rebecca Schroyer’s knowledge of
the fact that Grace McColgan was unfit to be a teacher, Defendants allowed Jane Doe to remain in
the same classroom with Grace McColgan despite the physical abuse.
15. That, the Defendants knew that Jane Doe was non-verbal and incapable of
protecting herself and the Defendants withheld information regarding the physical altercation
information from John Doe.
16. Upon information and belief, Defendants knew or should have known about prior
incidents involving Grace McColgan and they should have known that she was unfit to supervisor
Page 4
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Jan 12 4:01 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP2600193
special needs students.
17. As a result of the aforesaid acts and/or omissions of the Defendants, Plaintiff Jane
Doe sustained damages.
FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Gross Negligence
18. The allegations of the preceding paragraphs are hereby incorporated and alleged as
if fully set forth herein.
19. At all times set forth herein, Defendants owed Plaintiff Jane Doe, a minor student
in their care, custody, and control, a duty to supervise, protect, and ensure that Jane Doe was safe
from predatory behavior, physical abuse, harassment, and/or intimidation.
20. Defendants acted in a negligent, grossly negligent, willful, wanton, and reckless
manner and breached the duty owed to Plaintiff Jane Doe by failing to exercise even a slight degree
of care in the following particulars:
a) By failing to establish sufficient rules and procedures governing the behavior of
faculty and staff such that would adequately protect students from predatory
behavior, physical abuse, harassment, and/or intimidation;
b) By failing to enforce rules and procedures governing the behavior of the faculty
and staff employed by Defendants—especially in regards to special needs children;
c) By failing to adequately provide for the physical safety of students;
d) By failing to provide sufficient training and supervision to HCSD employees and/or
agents tasked with supervising and education minor children;
e) By failing to adequately address and/or report instances of predatory behavior,
physical abuse, harassment, and/or intimidation against students by teachers, and
Grace McColgan specifically;
Page 5
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Jan 12 4:01 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP2600193
f) In failing to report to the Department of Social Services and the minor’s parents
inappropriate and abuse behavior by teachers; and
g) In such other particulars as the evidence at trial may show.
Any one or more of which acts of commission and/or omission were a proximate cause of
the injuries suffered by Plaintiffs. Said acts of commission and/or omission were in violation of
the statutory laws of the State of South Carolina.
FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Negligent Hiring, Supervision & Retention as to all Defendants)
21. Plaintiff herein realleges and reiterates all previous paragraphs as fully as if set forth
in this paragraph in its entirety.
22. Defendants had a duty to act reasonably in hiring and retaining employees and to
promulgate and enforce rules and regulations to ensure its employees and/or agents acted in a
reasonable and safe manner.
23. That Defendants owed a duty to Jane Doe, Jane Doe’s parents, and other students
to hire only personnel and employees who were appropriate to act Principals, teachers, nurses, and
other employees and not to hire personnel and employees who placed Jane Doe and other students
at a risk of being injured, harassed, and emotionally battered.
24. That Defendants were grossly negligent and breached its duties continually by
hiring personnel and/or employees who commit the acts described in this Complaint and others,
and the Defendants had knowledge that these persons committed wrongful prior conduct but failed
to remedy the situation and failed to take any steps to protect the students at Ocean Bay
Elementary.
25. The Defendants owed a duty to Jane Doe and others to supervise its employees and
not to allow its employees and/or agents to place Jane Doe and others at a risk of being injured.
Page 6
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Jan 12 4:01 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP2600193
26. That Defendants breached that duty by failing to supervise its employees and
personnel who committed the acts described in this Complaint and Defendants had knowledge that
these persons were likely to commit and/or did commit wrongful conduct but failed to remediate
the situation.
27. The Defendants owed a duty to Jane Doe, her parents, and others to investigate the
wrongful and unacceptable conduct of its teachers and personnel and take appropriate action,
having been on notice of its' employees' and/or agents’ unfitness and risk of harm to others.
28. The Defendants breached that duty by failing to undertake any appropriate
investigation, discharge, remedial training or reassignment of its’ employees and/or agents.
29. Defendants were grossly, negligent, carless, reckless, willful and wanton in the
following particulars, to wit:
a) In then and there failing to use reasonable care in selecting and retaining
competent and fit teachers and employees;
b) In failing to prevent their teachers from injuring Jane Doe and other
students;
c) In then and there hiring Defendant Grace McColgan when it knew or should
have known that she was not fit to perform the duties of the job in a safe
and proper manner without causing harm to others, specifically this
Plaintiff;
d) In then and there failing to conduct a reasonable investigation to determine
if Grace McColgan was fit for the work assigned to her;
e) In then and there failing to provide proper and necessary supervision and
monitoring to ensure that Grace McColgan performed her duties in a proper
and safe manner;
f) In then and there hiring and retaining Grace McColgan and Rebecca
Schroyer as employees and/or agents when they knew or should have
known that she was unable to conduct themselves properly in a safe and
reasonable manner;
g) In then and there hiring and retaining Grace McColgan and Rebecca
Schroyer as employees and/or agents when they knew or should have
known that he was in the habit of conducting themselves in a manner
dangerous to others;
h) In then and there retaining Grace McColgan as an employee and failing to
investigate, discharge or reassign her when they were aware or should have
become aware of the problems that indicated her unfitness;
Page 7
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Jan 12 4:01 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP2600193
i) In failing to properly and adequately train, manage, and supervise their
employees, management, and staff;
j) In failing to hire competent management and staff to oversee and supervise
its employees;
k) In failing to provide sufficient monitoring and supervision to prevent
foreseeable falls and injuries to Jane Doe while in the Defendant’s care;
l) In violating the laws, statutes, and ordinances of the State of South Carolina
enacted to protect the safety and health of the public and invitees, so as to
constitute negligence per se; and
m) In such other particulars as the evidence at trial may show.
As a result of the aforesaid acts and/or omissions of the Defendants, Plaintiff Jane Doe
sustained damages.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that this Court enter judgment against Defendants for any
and all damages as provided under the South Carolina Tort Claims Act in an appropriate amount,
and for the costs of this action and for such other and further relief as this Honorable Court deems
just, in an amount to be determined by a jury.
s/Tiffany K. Buffkin
Ian D. Maguire (SC Bar 66587)
Tiffany K. Buffkin (SC Bar 104090)
MAGUIRE LAW FIRM
1600 North Oak Street, Suite B
Myrtle Beach, South Carolina 29577
Telephone: (843) 361-7549
Facsimile: (843) 361-7048
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
Dated: January 12, 2023
Page 8
