Close
Updated:

A Decades-Long Fight for Justice – $1.6 Million Settlement in Mountain View Whisman School District

The law firm of Cerri, Boskovich & Allard secured justice for two survivors of sexual abuse that occurred over 50 years ago. The Mountain View Whisman School District (MVWSD) agreed to pay $1.6 million to settle a lawsuit brought by two former students who alleged abuse by Steven Myers, a former teacher and vice principal at Crittenden Middle School in the 1970s. This settlement marks a crucial step toward accountability for past failures in student protection and highlights a disturbing pattern of misconduct by Myers, who also faced allegations in Santa Cruz City Schools (SCCS).

The case, emerging nearly 50 years after the alleged abuse, highlights both the enduring impact of childhood trauma and the evolving legal landscape that has enabled survivors to seek justice decades later.

The MVWSD settlement addresses claims by two former Crittenden Middle School students who allege that Myers groomed and sexually assaulted them in the 1970s. The allegations center on Myers’ operation of the Traveling School Summer Program, a six-week initiative targeting students with behavioral and academic challenges. Described as a “school on wheels,” the program incorporated controversial elements, including “Body Theme Days” where students were required to wear minimal clothing, such as bikinis or speedos, and participate in massage sessions led by Myers.

Depositions from the lawsuit revealed a shocking lack of oversight: no policies governed teacher-student interactions, background checks were not conducted, and the district failed to supervise the program adequately.

The MVWSD settlement is part of a larger legal reckoning involving Myers, whose actions extended beyond Mountain View. The case parallels a 2024 settlement by SCCS, where similar allegations surfaced, pointing to a pattern of abuse across multiple school districts.

The Santa Cruz City Schools Lawsuit and Settlement

In 2024, Santa Cruz City Schools settled for $4.5 million with two former students who alleged abuse by Myers between 1987 and 1991, during his tenure as principal of Branciforte Junior High School from 1981 to 1984. The plaintiffs claimed Myers used his authority to perpetrate sexual abuse, exploiting the same Traveling School Summer Program he had run at Crittenden. The program, later integrated into the SCCS curriculum, targeted vulnerable students, many from unstable home environments, and included questionable practices, such as massage classes and “body discovery” objectives.

One plaintiff, identified as John Doe 4, was a gifted athlete in the Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) program whose life was derailed by the abuse. His dreams of college and sports crumbled, leading to struggles with depression, drug addiction, and a sense of indifference toward his own survival. The SCCS lawsuit revealed that the district failed to conduct background checks or evaluate Myers during his employment, despite earlier red flags from his time at Crittenden. The lack of oversight allowed Myers to continue his predatory behavior unchecked, with no rules governing inappropriate teacher-student interactions, such as sharing rooms on trips or conducting massages.

The SCCS settlement, like the MVWSD case, exposed systemic failures in school administration during the 1970s and 1980s, raising questions about how such misconduct went unaddressed for so long. Both settlements reflect a growing recognition of the need for accountability in educational institutions, particularly for historical abuses that have left lasting scars on survivors.

Why the Lawsuit Took 50 Years

The MVWSD lawsuit, filed nearly 50 years after the alleged abuse, was made possible by significant changes in California law that have expanded victims’ rights. In 1973, when the alleged abuses at Crittenden occurred, California’s legal framework posed significant barriers for survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Additionally, plaintiffs had to file a government tort claim against a public entity like a school district within 100 days of the incident (Government Code § 911.2). These strict deadlines, combined with the absence of a “delayed discovery” rule for childhood sexual abuse, made it nearly impossible for survivors to pursue legal action if they did not report the abuse immediately.

Many survivors, including those in the MVWSD and SCCS cases, repressed their trauma or feared disbelief, further delaying legal action. The lack of robust mandatory reporting laws (the modern Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act was not fully developed until later) meant schools often failed to act on warning signs, and abusers like Myers avoided scrutiny.

The passage of the California Child Victims Act (AB 218) in 2020 was a game-changer. Effective January 1, 2020, AB 218 eliminated the statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse claims filed on or after January 1, 2024, and opened a three-year lookback window (2020–2022) for survivors to file claims for older abuses, regardless of expired deadlines. This legal reform allowed the MVWSD and SCCS plaintiffs to bring their cases decades later, seeking justice for harm suffered in the 1970s and 1980s. The extended statutes of limitations and revival window were critical in enabling survivors to confront the long-term impact of their trauma, which often manifests years later in the form of mental health challenges, addiction, or broken relationships.

Myers resigned from SCCS in 1991 amid concerns but faced no criminal prosecution due to statutes of limitations and jurisdictional issues. His teaching credentials were revoked in California and Colorado after reports of sexual misconduct surfaced. Allegations against him are extensive: at least 11 men have reported sexual abuse, and over 20 men and boys have described unwanted or abusive sexual experiences during their minor years. These claims span multiple locations, including Mountain View, Santa Cruz, and Denver.

These cases highlight the importance of modern safeguards, such as mandatory background checks, robust reporting laws, and trauma-informed support for survivors. For survivors, these settlements offer a measure of closure, though the scars of abuse endure.

Contact Us