IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA 

EZEKIYAL WELLS, Case No. 

 

 Plaintiff, 

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND

vs. FOR JURY TRIAL 

RALSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS; and 

THOMAS EARHART (an individual being sued 

in his individual capacity), 

 

 Defendants. 

COMPLAINT 

COMES NOW, Plaintiff, Ezekiyal Wells (“Wells”), by and through his counsel of 

record, Oluseyi O. Olowolafe of Olowolafe Law Firm, LLC, alleges and states as follows: 

NATURE OF THE ACTION 

1. This lawsuit arises out of the racial discrimination by a Ralston High School 

teacher, Mr. Thomas Earhart (“Earhart”) upon using Wells’ yearbook photograph, without his 

knowledge or consent, on a zoology final exam to his students referencing Wells as an animal. 

2. Plaintiff seeks money damages for (1) racial discrimination in violation of 42 

U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution; (2) 

invasion of privacy in violation of NEB. REV. STAT § 20-204; and (3) Intentional Infliction of 

Emotional Distress under the laws of the state of Nebraska.

JURISDICTION & VENUE 

3. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. This Court has 

jurisdiction over the claims in this Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. (racial 

discrimination), 28 U.S.C § 1331 (federal question), 28 U.S.C § 1343 (civil rights), and 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1988. 

4. This Court also exercises supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367. 

5. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), as the 

events giving rise to Wells’ claims occurred in Douglas County, Nebraska, and pursuant to 18 

U.S.C. § 1965. 

8:23-cv-00226 Doc # 1 Filed: 05/26/23 Page 1 of 6 - Page ID # 1
-2- 

PARTIES 

6. Plaintiff Ezekiyal Wells is a citizen of the United States and resides in Omaha, 

Nebraska. Plaintiff was a junior student at Ralston High School at all relevant times herein. Wells’ 

photograph of him was used during the incident in question on or about May 27, 2021. 

7. Defendant Ralston Public Schools is a local school district located in Ralston, 

Nebraska, organized under the laws of the State of Nebraska. Ralston High School is a public 

school operating within the school district. Ralston Public Schools is the legal entity responsible 

for Ralston High School. 

8. Defendant Thomas Earhart was at all times relevant herein, a Zoology teacher at 

Ralston High School, and was ultimately responsible for Wells’ yearbook photograph being 

included on a zoology final exam. This Defendant is sued in his individual capacity. 

9. All mentioned individual Defendants were acting within the scope of their 

employment at the times of the incidents giving rise to the causes of action. All Defendants have 

acted and continued to act under the color of law in the State of Nebraska at all times relevant to 

this Complaint. Their deprivations of Wells’ constitutional rights are set forth in the following 

statements of facts and causes of action. 

STATEMENTS OF FACT 

10. On or about May 27, 2021, Earhart administered a final examination for the 

students enrolled in a zoology class that he taught at Ralston High School. 

11. Earhart’s first question on the exam included a picture of Wells’ yearbook 

photograph. 

12. Earhart’s question referred to Wells’ yearbook photograph which asked, “which 

class includes the animal shown?” 

13. Earhart’s final exam contained no other photographs of humans. 

14. Earhart’s final exam contained no other photographs of students. 

15. Wells was not a current student in Earhart’s class. 

16. Wells only became aware that his yearbook photograph was used on Earhart’s 

zoology exam when he encountered several students laughing at Wells’ photograph that was on 

Earhart’s final exam. 

17. Ultimately Wells was shown a digital copy of the exam question that contained his 

photograph by the students. 

8:23-cv-00226 Doc # 1 Filed: 05/26/23 Page 2 of 6 - Page ID # 2
-3- 

18. The digital copy of the exam question that included and referenced Wells’ yearbook 

photograph immediately began to circulate amongst Wells’ fellow students via Snapchat. 

19. As a result, Wells was devastated and humiliated that Earhart used his yearbook 

photograph to reference him as an animal on a zoology final exam. 

20. Wells immediately contacted his mother Natalie Wells (“Ms. Wells”). 

21. Upon learning of the unauthorized and misuse of Wells’ photograph on the zoology 

final exam, Ms. Wells contacted Ralston High School Principal Ms. Jesse Tvrdy (“Tvrdy”). 

22. Tvrdy stated that she would investigate the incident regarding the use of Wells’ 

photograph on the zoology final exam. 

23. Earhart ultimately called Ms. Wells and apologized for using Wells’ photograph on 

the final exam. 

24. When asked why he had included Wells’ photograph on the zoology final exam 

referencing Wells as an animal, Earhart informed Ms. Wells simply that Wells had been in his 

class the previous year and that he had a conversation about primates with Wells during that period. 

25. As a result of Defendant’s actions, Wells has suffered significant injuries including, 

but not limited to, racial discrimination, ridicule, loss of relationships, and severe emotional 

distress. 

26. Plaintiff has complied with all preconditions to filing a claim under the Nebraska 

Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act. On December 24, 2021, the claim was submitted in writing 

to Ralston Public School District Superintendent Dr. Mark Adler. On March 2, 2022, the claim 

was resubmitted to the Ralston Public School Board President Mary Roarty. On April 10, 2023, 

well after six (6) months had lapsed since the claim was filed, Plaintiff withdrew his claim from 

Defendant’s consideration. 

COUNT I 

TITLE VI CLAIM- RACIAL DISCRIMINATION OF WELLS 

27. The allegations of paragraphs 1 through 26 are incorporated herein by reference. 

28. As described above, on or about May 27, 2021, Earhart deliberately used Wells’ 

yearbook photograph on a question in a zoology exam referencing Wells as an animal. 

29. Earhart’s conduct of using Wells’ photograph on the zoology final exam was 

motivated upon Wells race and color, as no other students’ nor faculty members’ photographs were 

used within the zoology final exam. 

8:23-cv-00226 Doc # 1 Filed: 05/26/23 Page 3 of 6 - Page ID # 3
-4- 

30. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Earhart, who was employed by 

Defendant Ralston Public Schools, Wells was subjected to racial discrimination by use and 

referencing of Wells photograph on Earhart’s zoology exam. 

31. The action of Earhart was performed under color of state law and violated Wells’ 

rights under 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States 

Constitution. 

32. The conduct of Earhart was willful and exhibited a flagrant disregard for Wells’ 

federally secured rights. Accordingly, under the doctrine of respondeat superior, Defendants are 

liable to Wells under 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States 

Constitution. 

COUNT II 

INVASION OF PRIVACY- USE OF WELLS’ PHOTOGRAPH 

33. The allegations of paragraphs 1 through 32 are incorporated herein by reference. 

34. As described above, Earhart used Wells’ photograph on a zoology final exam 

referencing Wells as an animal. 

35. Earhart’s use and reference to Wells’ photograph as an animal on a high school 

zoology final exam was highly offensive to Wells. 

36. Although the zoology final exam was disseminated to only the students in Earhart’s 

class, the exam question for which Earhart used Wells’ photograph and reference to Wells was 

circulated amongst Wells’ fellow classmate via Snapchat. 

37. Earhart knew and acted in reckless disregard when he used Wells’ photograph on 

the zoology final exam and referenced Wells as an animal. 

38. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Earhart, who was employed by 

Defendant Ralston Public Schools, Wells’ privacy was invaded when his photograph was used 

without his permission and without his knowledge. 

39. The action of Defendant was performed under color of state law and violated Wells’ 

rights under NEB. REV. STAT. § 20-204.

40. Accordingly, under the doctrine of respondeat superior, Defendants are liable to 

Wells under NEB. REV. STAT. § 20-204. 

8:23-cv-00226 Doc # 1 Filed: 05/26/23 Page 4 of 6 - Page ID # 4
-5- 

COUNT III 

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 

41. The allegations of paragraphs 1 through 40 are incorporated herein by reference. 

42. Earhart use of Wells’ photograph on a zoology final exam which referenced Wells, 

a former student of Earhart, as an animal is conduct that is so outrageous that it is to be regarded 

as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. 

43. Earhart was aware that he did not have permission or consent from Wells nor Ms. 

Wells to use Wells’ photograph within the zoology final exam. 

44. Earhart’s use of Wells’ photograph within the zoology final exam was intentional 

causing Wells to suffer severe emotional distress. 

45. Alternatively, Earhart’s use of Wells’ photograph within the zoology final exam 

was reckless in that Earhart was aware that the zoology final exam containing Wells’ photograph 

would be disseminated to Wells’ classmates without Wells consent or knowledge. 

46. Earhart’s unauthorize and misuse of Wells’ photograph on the zoology final exam 

caused Wells emotional distress in that he was ridiculed and humiliated as a result. 

47. Digital copies of the exam question containing Wells’ photograph were ultimately 

circulated via Snapchat amongst Wells’ classmates. 

48. As a direct result of the actions of Earhart, Wells was subjected to ridicule, 

humiliation, and emotional distress. 

49. The action of Earhart was performed under color of state law and violated Wells’ 

rights under the laws of the state of Nebraska relating to Intentional Infliction of Emotional 

Distress. 

50. Accordingly, under the doctrine of respondeat superior, Defendants are liable to 

Wells under the laws of the state of Nebraska relating to Intentional Infliction of Emotional 

Distress. 

RELIEF REQUESTED 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays for judgement in his favor and against 

Defendants on all counts and for the following relief;

A. Compensatory damages against all defendants jointly and severally in an amount to be 

determined at trial;

8:23-cv-00226 Doc # 1 Filed: 05/26/23 Page 5 of 6 - Page ID # 5
-6- 

B. Punitive damages against all defendants as allowed by law in an amount to be 

determined at trial;

C. Pre- and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;

D. Reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees incurred herein in accordance with; and 

E. For such further relief that the Court may deem just and equitable. 

REQUEST FOR PLACE OF TRIAL 

Plaintiff requests Omaha as the place for trial. 

DATED: May 26, 2023 

 Respectfully submitted, 

 EZEKIYAL WELLS 

 BY: /s/ Oluseyi O. Olowolafe 

Oluseyi O. Olowolafe 

NE Bar Number: 26896 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

Olowolafe Law Firm, LLC 

1201 Golden Gate Drive 

Papillion, NE 68046 

Telephone: (402) 995-9554 

Email: seyi.olowolafe@ololawfirm.com

 

8:23-cv-00226 Doc # 1 Filed: 05/26/23 Page 6 of 6 - Page ID # 6