PERK School Lawsuits filed on Parents and Students

PERK is a dedicated non-profit organization that actively advocates for children's rights, parental rights, civil rights, and the essential principle of medical freedom. The organization recognizes the harmful effects of restrictive mandates and poorly designed policies on children and families within the state. Through its initiatives, PERK strives to elevate awareness and encourage positive change that benefits the well-being of all families.


Willows Community School Lawsuit

PERK Files Lawsuit On Behalf Of students and Parents

PROTECTION OF THE EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS OF KIDS, a California non-profit corporation; DEE BARSHON, PAUL BARSHON, SHIRA AFLALO and YOTAM SHOCHAT, vs. THE WILLOWS COMMUNITY SCHOOL

Third Amended Complaint filed September 25, 2024.

In a groundbreaking legal move, families have filed a lawsuit on January 12, 2024 against The Willows School in Culver City for unlawfully mandating the COVID-19 vaccine as a prerequisite for student attendance. At the most recent court hearing, on September 24, 2024, Judge Kerry Bensinger overruled the schools attempt to dismiss the case, and instead ruled in favor of PERK and the plaintiffs as they move forward on the contract claim violation.

The lawsuit, filed by the nonprofit Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids (PERK), on behalf of the families, alleges that The Willows School breached its obligations and contractual agreements by imposing an illegal mandate and subsequently excluding children from education when their families did not comply. The plaintiffs in the case, families directly impacted by The Willows’ vaccine mandate, are standing firm in their claim that the school’s actions were not only harmful but also unlawful.

They state, "We’re all very pleased to see that this decision from the court is a vindication of the years of belief that we had done nothing wrong and only cared for the safety and wellbeing of our children. The Willows caused great damage and anxiety, not just to our families, but to many others with their belief that they had a right to control what medical procedures they could force onto us. I hope this first stage of the proceedings closes the door to any other educational facilities that think they are able to make medical decisions for our kids. This would have never happened if not for the diligence and ethical belief from PERK that we need to protect all children from outside influence."

PERK’s legal team is challenging the school’s policy, asserting that decisions regarding medical procedures should remain with parents and healthcare professionals—not educational institutions. The lawsuit seeks to prevent future incidents of similar policies being enacted without proper legal or ethical grounds. The case highlights a growing concern among parents nationwide regarding the imposition of vaccine mandates by schools.

President of PERK, Amy Bohn stated, “The overreach of schools during the time of Covid can never be forgotten. In this instance, these families and children were harmed by the abrupt and illegal removal from school. The only way to prevent this from happening again is to hold the school accountable and ensure the families harmed have been made whole.”

PERK’s lead attorney, Scott Street of JW Howard Attorneys, agreed. “During the pandemic, too many schools acted without thinking. They didn’t think about the legality of their actions or the potential consequences. They assumed that judges would protect them if families ever went to court to seek a remedy for that. And some judges have done that. But we are grateful that Judge Bensinger saw through that and allowed this case to proceed.”

Factual allegation in the case:

Plaintiffs have children who attended The Willows, a private school in Culver City that costs between $32,525 and $45,000 per year, plus $6,485 in fees. The Barshons’ sons started in kindergarten, while Ms. Aflalo’s and Mr. Shochat’s daughter began in Developmental Kindergarten. In California, children must show proof of certain vaccinations to attend school. The Barshons' son had a legal medical exemption allowing him to attend The Willows without vaccinations, while Ms. Aflalo’s and Mr. Shochat’s daughter was fully vaccinated. Other students also had vaccine exemptions, and before the Covid-19 pandemic, The Willows supported medical freedom. However, during the 2021-2022 school year, The Willows required eligible students aged 5 to 11 to get the Covid-19 vaccine to attend in-person classes, with a deadline of February 1, 2022. This policy was reportedly issued by Willows administrators, including Kitty Cohen, Lisa Rosenstein, and Terry Baird, acting within their job responsibilities.

The Covid vaccine policy was unprecedented. The Willows required its students to receive other vaccines set by the California Department of Public Health (DPH), not by the school itself. State law mandates that any new school vaccination rules must come from the Legislature or the DPH, allowing individuals to obtain exemptions based on personal beliefs. Even as a private school, The Willows must follow this law.

The Willows rejected all exemption requests, including those based on religious beliefs. They forced unvaccinated students into independent study with limited instruction (via Zoom) twice a week. These students were only allowed to take Math, English, and Science, and they were barred from extracurricular activities and school events, including field trips. These actions violated California law, including court rulings made during the COVID-19 pandemic that deemed such practices illegal.

As of February 1, 2022, The Willows required students aged 5 to 11 to have started the COVID-19 vaccine series. The school stopped offering independent study programs for those who didn't receive the vaccine. Consequently, the Barshons' son was effectively expelled from The Willows for not getting the shot, along with other students. Ms. Aflalo’s and Mr. Shochat’s daughter got COVID-19 during winter break in 2021, which made her unable to receive the vaccine. The family provided a doctor's note stating she couldn't take the shot for ninety days. Despite this, school officials did not allow her to attend in-person classes after April 22, 2022. She finished second grade remotely and was later expelled due to the vaccination mandate.

Quote from the Willows Plaintiffs regarding the tentative ruling:

We’re all very pleased to see that this decision from the court is a vindication of the years of belief that we had done nothing wrong and only cared for the safety and wellbeing of our children. The Willows caused great damage and anxiety, not just to our families, but many others in their belief that they had a right to control what medical procedures they could force onto us.  I hope this first stage of the proceedings closes the door to any other educational facilities that think they are able to make medical decisions for our kids.  This would have never happened if not for the diligence and ethical belief from PERK that we need to protect all children from outside influence.  


Granada Hills Charter School (GHC) LAWSUIT

PERK Files Lawsuit On Behalf Of Teachers And Educators Of Granada Hills High School 


The First Teachers And Educators in The State Of California Fired For Refusing To Take The COVID Shot

On Friday, Jan. 14, 2022, the Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids (PERK) and five individual educators filed a lawsuit against Brian Bauer, Executive Director of Granada Hills Charter High School (GH Charter) and GH Charter.  The plaintiffs filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief, damages based on violations of civil rights, and requested a jury trial. Attorney John Howard and Attorney Scott Street from JW Howard Attorneys, LTD represent the plaintiffs. Case is headed to trial November 4th, 2024.

Filed Complaint


CVUSD LAWSUIT

Parents File First Lawsuit in California Suing the School District for Violating the Law

The District Is Being Sued For Illegally Providing Minors With Inappropriate “Gender Affirming” Surveys, Medically and Age-Inappropriate Curriculum, Without Proper Parent Notification

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE IN THOUSAND OAKS, CALIFORNIA, NOVEMBER 7TH, 2022-  On Friday, November 4th, 2022, plaintiffs Steven Schneider and Carrie Burgert, filed a lawsuit against Conejo Valley School District. for declaratory and injunctive relief, and petition for writ of mandate against the unconstitutional and illegal actions of the district. The Plaintiffs are represented by Attorney John Howard and Attorney Scott J. Street of JW Howard/ Attorneys, Ltd.  

The complaint states the following

“The District has a clear and present duty to provide health/sex education that complies with California law. Instead, the District decided—in an arbitrary and irrational manner— to provide an education that is not age appropriate, medically accurate and free of bias. In so doing, it violated both its ministerial and discretionary duties.”

“These actions are unlawful. Schools have an obligation to teach health and sex education to kids. They do not have the right to teach kids about woke political issues that are, at best, medically unsettled and certainly not age appropriate. And, regardless of what school boards want to teach, they must respect the fundamental right that parents have to control their kids’ upbringing. Our children may be our future, but it is their parents’ right and responsibility to raise them.”

The Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids (PERK), is a bi-partisan, non-profit that advocates for civil rights and freedoms, with particular focus on protecting children.  PERK protects parental rights and represents tens of thousands of parents and children across the state.  PERK is supporting this lawsuit, and many others, and released the following statement:

Transitioning a child’s gender, promoting gender affirming treatment, and sexually explicit curriculum to minors without parent’s knowledge or proper consent is illegal. School Districts are clearly violating the law by providing minors with inappropriate “gender affirming” surveys and “gender affirming treatments” while withholding this from parents.  These, so called, “Support Plans,” remove the most important and vital protection children have, the parent.  This issue is getting national attention as the practice is increasing to give children puberty blockers to alter their gender.

This is not an LGBTQ issue. This is about the children.  Children are minors.  They are not equipped to make decisions of this nature without their parents.  They should not be manipulated to make life altering medical treatments without their parents’ knowledge and consent.  These choices are for adults to make, not minors. This is also about parents being the sole protectors and guardian of their child’s body, development, and mind.

The fundamental questions to ask are this: “Do you believe the government and/or school should be able to transition what gender your child is using puberty blockers and gender reassignment surgeries disguised as “support plans” without parental knowledge or consent?” Do you believe a child is capable of making a body altering, health decision, and treatment that’s irreversible, with consequences beyond their capacity as minors to even comprehend?

LAUSD Lawsuit

School lawsuit filed Amended Complaint

Los Angeles Unified School District, Culver City Unified School, Piedmont Unified School District, Oakland Unified School District, Hayward Unified School District, San Diego Unified School District and any other districts that implement or vote to implement any COVID-19 injection mandate will be the first targets of these suits. Following this line of attack, we then plan to address the Governor’s plan to implement a statewide mandate. This will be a massive battle that will likely be ongoing for some time. Our intent is to see this fight to the end.

For the last 10 months, we have all been holding the line and pushing back on these illegal mandates together. While AAC and their clients bravely held the line, patiently waiting for their Writ Petition to be heard, we – on behalf of our clients Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids and Children’s Health Defense, California Chapter – have been mounting an aggressive offense, battling LAUSD to stave off as many harms and protect as many children as possible. Immediately. We went to court not once, but three times, to push back the mandates and were successful in not only pushing enforcement back until Fall 2022 and then, again, to July 2022, but to force the District to concede that it must and will align with state law. This announcement was made less than 48 hours after Beckloff granted our request to deny LAUSD’s frivolous, bad-faith attempt to dismiss our lawsuit. In January, we completely struck down Piedmont Unified School District’s illegal mandate on children 5 and up with no independent study option, a final ruling (no appeal) that caused Oakland Unified to withdraw its mandate, and likely inspired hundreds of other school districts to do the same.

The petition states all the reasons why LAUSD and its board members have no legal authority to issue a Covid-19 vaccine requirement. It also requests that the court inform LAUSD, emphatically, that the vaccine requirement is null and void and LAUSD cannot enforce their illegal mandate.

Amended Petition filed 2/1/22

NEW * GF v. LAUSD: Ruling GRANTING Writ Petition, denying District's Authority to Require CV19 Vaccines

Jul 6, 2022

  On Tuesday, July 5, the absolute last day for Judge Beckloff to issue his final ruling on the Writ Petition of Aannestad Andelin & Corn, LLP in their lawsuit, G.F. v. Los Angeles Unified School District case, he did. And he did a complete 180. In his 9 page... LAUSD dropped the mandate.

PERK v. LAUSD Post 9/8 Hearing Summary

On September 8th, 2023, the court initially scheduled the hearing of LAUSD’s Motion to Dismiss and Demurrer to our Fourth Amended Petition/Complaint in addition to setting a date for trial. The day before, on September 7th, by way of a minute order, the court decided not to address the merits of either motion and instead asked that LAUSD and PERK further inform the court of whether the timing was “ripe”.  The parties must now address whether LAUSD’s practices during Covid-19, which affected in-person education by way of mandate implementation, is a subject that is now too early to be heard when there is no longer a present public health order at issue. The court is not concerned about the “moot” issue as before but is now wanting to make sure the subject is ready to be addressed. The hearing date on the issue of “Ripeness” is scheduled for November 29th, 2023, and the Motion to Dismiss and Demurrer to our Fourth Amended Petition/Complaint in addition to the Trial Setting Conference have all been advanced to the same date. As of November 16, 2023, the parties have been submitting briefings on the “ripeness” issue. The hearing date for all motions and briefings remains the same." 

Piedmont Unified Lawsuit

CHD, PERK v. Peidmont Unified School District: Order GRANTING Stay on CV19 Requirement on Children 5+

CHD, PERK v. Piedmont Unified School District: Tentative Ruling Granting Stay on Vaccine Mandate for Children 5+

In January, we completely struck down Piedmont Unified School District’s illegal mandate on children 5 and up with no independent study option, a finalruling (no appeal) that caused Oakland Unified to withdraw its mandate, and likely inspired hundreds of other school districts to do the same.

Status: Won