Opinion ID: 589625
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Conspiracy to Deprive Plaintiffs of Constitutional Rights

Text: 69 Plaintiffs also charge that defendants engaged in a conspiracy to interfere with their civil rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3). In order to prevail, plaintiffs must show a conspiracy on the part of the school defendants to deprive them of equal protection or equal privileges and immunities motivated by class-based, invidiously discriminatory customs and practices of failing to protect female students from sexual, physical and verbal abuse. Specifically, the amended complaints assert that the school defendants' acts in setting up the graphics arts classroom to include a darkroom and unisex bathroom constituted a deliberate and reckless indifference to female students' rights. 70 We agree with the district court that plaintiffs failed to assert any facts from which any type of conspiratorial agreement between the school defendants and the student defendants can be inferred. Neither do the pleadings establish that the alleged discriminatory policies or practices were due to plaintiffs' membership in the class of female students. [M]ere conclusory allegations of deprivations of constitutional rights, Robinson v. McCorkle, 462 F.2d 111, 113 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1042, 93 S.Ct. 529, 34 L.Ed.2d 492 (1972), are insufficient to state a § 1985(3) claim. Id.