NEWPORT NEWS, Va. — In court Friday afternoon, attorneys representing Abby Zwerner and the school division argued over the need for documentation and eyewitness information regarding the school shooting on January 6.
Zwerner and her legal team filed a $40 million lawsuit against Newport News Public Schools in April, after one of her students took his mother's gun to Richneck Elementary School and shot her in her classroom.
In the lawsuit, Zwerner's attorneys said school administrators like then-Assistant Principal Dr. Ebony Parker ignored vital warnings that the boy had a gun on him the day of the shooting.
Since then, attorneys for the school administrators and school board filed a motion to dismiss Zwerner's lawsuit, or a "Plea in Bar," saying Zwerner's "workplace injuries" should be covered by worker's compensation.
13News Now also learned the attorney representing Dr. Parker filed a separate motion to dismiss Zwerner's lawsuit, making similar arguments.
In the lawsuit, Zwerner's attorneys say Dr. Parker ignored vital warnings that the boy had a gun the day of the shooting.
Zwerner's attorneys said they've been struggling for months to get the proper documents and eyewitness information to move forward in their case. It's part of the "discovery process" in court, which is the formal process of exchanging information between the parties about the witnesses and evidence they plan to present at trial.
In a hearing Friday with Newport News Circuit Court Judge Matthew Hoffman, the defense [school board attorneys] argued the information requested by Zwerner's team is too sensitive. They added a lot of the information includes students and school records, many of which are protected under the Family Education Rights & Privacy Act (FERPA).
The school's legal team called on Judge Hoffman to delay the discovery process until he makes a decision on whether Zwerner's lawsuit falls under worker's compensation. If he rules in favor of the school division regarding the lawsuit, then that would mean he would have no jurisdiction to hear the case.
They claimed it would not make sense for the judge to approve the discovery process prior to his decision on the worker's compensation argument.
Zwerner's team has argued over the past couple of months that the school board's argument of worker's compensation implies it's an expectation for teachers like Zwerner to get shot on the job as a workplace injury.
"That is something that we feel has been outrageous in this case to delay the discovery process in order to get to the plea in bar," Zwerner's attorney, Diane Toscano, explained.
The judge allowed the discovery process to continue, even though he has not made a decision on Zwerner's lawsuit.
"It means we're going to get access to the individuals they're aware of and then from there, the question would be who do we wish to depose and if parties agree to a child or teacher or eyewitness, then that'll be allowed," an attorney on Zwerner's legal team, Kevin Biniazan, explained.
Biniazan and Toscano said their next goal is to secure information of teachers and school administrators to interview them as part of their investigation.
"We've asked for the identity of all first-grade teachers of Newport News," Biniazan explained. "We want to know whether the Newport News school teachers, that is first-grade teachers, think it's an actual danger of their job to be shot by a 6-year-old."
One of the attorneys on the legal team mentioned they are potentially looking to speak with any student who was an eyewitness the day of the shooting, but they explained that is a tedious and sensitive process they plan to handle with extreme care.
"Today was a good victory for us," said Toscano. "We look forward to getting the discovery process and plea in bar argued."
However, there are still some objections by the school division regarding document and interview requests separate from the argument in court. The attorneys on both sides are scheduled to go through each objection in court on August 9.
Judge Hoffman scheduled to hear Zwerner's case regarding her lawsuit and the argument of worker's compensation in court on October 27.