A dispute over alleged administrative misconduct in a public school district has led to a federal lawsuit, with claims that actions taken by district officials resulted in reputational harm, loss of employment opportunities, and violations of constitutional rights. The case centers on allegations that school administrators and police retaliated against a former employee after he raised concerns about irregularities within the district.
The complaint was filed by Thomas Anthony Simbeck in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, on March 13, 2026. The defendants named in the suit include the Dallas Independent School District (DISD), Detective Wendell Hawkins of the DISD Police Department, Robert Abel (former Chief of Human Capital Management), Ramona Soto (former Chief Legal Officer), Stephanie Elizalde (Superintendent), and five unnamed individuals employed by DISD.
According to the filing, Simbeck is a resident of Denton County and previously worked as a teacher for DISD. He alleges that during his employment—and continuing after his departure—he raised concerns about what he describes as “alleged falsification of campus surveys and other irregularities” within the district’s administration. These issues were reportedly brought up at a school board hearing on June 9, 2022. After this hearing, Simbeck spoke with Robert Abel in the parking lot of the DISD administrative building at 5151 Samuell Boulevard in Dallas regarding these concerns. Simbeck states that Abel assured him he would “take care of it,” but no threats were made during their conversation.
The complaint details that surveillance cameras at this location could have documented their interaction. Following continued criticism by Simbeck through emails and social media directed at DISD administration and policies, officials from DISD contacted their police department regarding his communications.
In August 2022—about two months after the parking lot encounter—Detective Wendell Hawkins emailed Robert Abel requesting a written statement about whether Abel felt “fear of imminent bodily injury” during his meeting with Simbeck. This request initiated an internal investigation into Simbeck’s conduct. According to Simbeck’s account, Detective Hawkins did not interview him or seek his explanation regarding any allegations; instead, statements from other administrators formed the basis for further action.
Simbeck reports learning only later that an investigation had been opened against him despite being told otherwise by Detective Hawkins. He claims this investigation led to his arrest following notice of an indictment for harassment after he participated in an in-person protest outside another DISD administrative office at 9400 North Central Expressway in Dallas.
Discovery materials from related criminal proceedings reportedly indicated that Simbeck’s arrest was made “to de-escalate the matter.” Communications linked to the investigation described him using alarming language—including comparisons to high-profile violent incidents such as being likened to “the Las Vegas shooter.” Additionally, statements suggesting mental instability or suicidal tendencies were allegedly circulated among law enforcement or prosecutorial staff despite no evaluation having been conducted by medical professionals nor any personal contact between Simbeck and some defendants.
Simbeck asserts these statements were used to influence law enforcement decisions and prosecutorial actions against him. Ultimately, according to court documents, all criminal charges were dismissed by Dallas County District Court on March 18, 2024. Despite this dismissal, Detective Hawkins allegedly continued communicating with prosecutors about possible further charges relating to Simbeck’s ongoing communications with school board members seeking oversight and accountability.
The lawsuit outlines three main claims: violation of civil rights under Title 42 Section 1983 for conducting an incomplete or misleading investigation leading to deprivation of constitutional rights; First Amendment retaliation for protected speech criticizing district administration; and violation of due process based on damaging statements affecting reputation and employment prospects without appropriate legal procedures.
Simbeck seeks compensatory damages for loss of employment opportunities, reputational harm, emotional distress, financial losses, attorney’s fees under Section 1988 where applicable, punitive damages where permitted by law, as well as any additional relief deemed just by the court. He has requested a jury trial on all triable issues.
The complaint identifies Thomas Anthony Simbeck as representing himself pro se in this matter. No attorneys are listed for either party within the document provided. The case is filed under Civil Action No. 3-26CV0813-E.
Source: 326cv00813_Thomas_Anthony_v_Dallas_Independent_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Texas.pdf
