Tentative September Trial Set in Turner v. Clayton Case

A tentative bench trial date of Sept. 26 has been scheduled in the Jane Turner v. case. The decision came Tuesday in a conference held in the .

Judge David Vincent is expected to gauge whether attorneys need more time in developing their respective cases at a July 22 status hearing.

The Missouri Supreme Court in July issued an opinion in the case stating that students from unaccredited districts can choose to attend any accredited district in the same or adjoining county and that the accepting district—which could include districts such as Clayton's—has no discretion in the matter.

The case and all issues that evolved from the Supreme Court ruling are now in the hands of the St. Louis County court.

Representatives at the conference included Elkin Kistner, the attorney representing Jane Turner and other parents, and Mark Bremer, who is representing the Clayton school district.

The case has been on hold so that attorneys could see whether the Missouri General Assembly would provide a legislative fix to the issues in question.

Vincent opened the conference by essentially asking for a refresher course on where both parties stand.

"The issue is whether the affirmative defenses that have been raised will prevail," Kistner said at one point.

Bremer said it is the Clayton school district's position that all of the defenses that have been raised should be tried.

Another person in appearance Tuesday: James Layton, solicitor general with the Missouri Attorney General's Office. He sat on Bremer's side of the courtroom and made several comments. At one point, he expressed concern that Kistner may, when arguing Turner v. Clayton, try to make the case "much, much broader than just these plaintiffs" by extrapolating it to thousands or tens of thousands of students interested in transferring to accredited schools.

"I don't understand the talk about other parties getting involved," Kistner responded at one point in the discussion.

Bremer said that he will need a "substantial amount of time" to prepare for trial and that he has done little work with experts yet.

"There's no real need for urgency here, the children are protected," said Bremer, referring to the educational needs of students whose parents are plaintiffs in Turner v. Clayton.

Bremer did express concern that one prospective expert wouldn't be ready by September, but Vincent said he would be able to better evaluate the attorneys' time needs later this year.