WORK WITH US
Court Affirms School’s Right to Temporary and Permanent Restraining Order Against Former Employee’s Threats
Lowry Yarbrough was an employee and contractor of Sacred Heart Catholic School in Hattiesburg, Mississippi. In February 2023, Yarbrough’s employment had ended due to his failure to comply with administrative requests involving his duties as a maintenance worker at the athletic complex.
Following his termination, Yarbrough allegedly made several troubling remarks, including, “It’s about to get ugly,” during a meeting with Karyn Charles, the School’s principal, and another school administrator. The statement alarmed school officials, prompting them to call the police, who escorted Yarbrough off campus.
A few months later, on June 9, 2023, Yarbrough allegedly sent flowers with a handwritten note to Charles. The note read, “Matthew 18 May [God’s] wrath be just & swift for the pain you have caused to that family. SEC. 97-37-17.” The reference to “SEC. 97-37-17” pertains to a Mississippi statute regarding weapons possession on educational property.
Subsequently, Yarbrough allegedly left a voicemail with the diocesan superintendent stating, “Sacred Heart has crossed the line this time, and they have met their match. I’m done.” The voicemail was allegedly related to Yarbrough’s belief that Sacred Heart had not provided a favorable reference for his children, who had transferred to another private school. Additionally, the School said that Yarbrough anonymously ordered flowers for Charles from a florist, using the pseudonym “James Smith,” the name of another School employee. The School knew that the flowers were from Yarbrough because Yarborough still provided his own phone number.
The School said that these incidents caused significant fear for Charles, the School staff, students, and their families. The School reported the matter to law enforcement, which advised Charles to pursue criminal charges. Charles testified that she remained terrified and considered the cryptic note and reference to a statute on weapons particularly menacing given the broader context of school violence.
Sacred Heart sought injunctive relief against Yarbrough, specifically a restraining order to prevent Yarbrough from coming near Charles and from coming on or near specified Sacred Heart properties. The School claimed that Yarbrough’s actions constituted a credible threat to the safety of the School community and infringed upon the School’s duty to ensure a safe environment for its students and staff.
The trial court granted the petition and Yarbrough appealed.
Injunctive relief under Mississippi law requires a showing of a substantive legal right that has been violated or is at risk. Yarbrough contended that the petition for injunctive relief lacked this underlying substantive cause of action. He argued that his actions were misinterpreted, asserting that the note accompanying the flowers symbolized forgiveness, not a threat. He denied any intention to harm and claimed that references in the note were misunderstood.
Sacred Heart argued that Yarbrough’s conduct, including threats and cryptic messages, posed an imminent threat to the safety of the School community. The School emphasized its legal duty to protect students and staff from harm, citing the heightened importance of school safety given recent incidents of school violence nationwide.
The Mississippi Court of Appeals agreed with the School and affirmed the trial court’s decision to grant both preliminary and permanent injunctions against Yarbrough.
The Court agreed that the injunction must be accompanied by an underlying claim, but concluded that Sacred Heart had demonstrated a legally cognizable claim based on its right and obligation to protect its community from foreseeable harm. The Court detailed multiple incidents, including the threatening note, voicemail, and prior confrontations, as evidence of an ongoing and credible threat posed by Yarbrough. The Court found Yarbrough’s testimony unconvincing, citing contradictions such as his use of a pseudonym when sending the flowers.
Finding that the School had demonstrated an underlying cause of action, the Court then evaluated the four factors for granting injunctive relief: (1) the plaintiff must demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of their claim; (2) the injunction must be necessary to prevent irreparable harm that cannot be remedied by other legal means; (3) the threatened harm to the plaintiff must outweigh any harm the injunction may cause to the defendant; and (4) the injunction must align with the public interest.
- Likelihood of Success on the Merits: Sacred Heart had a strong case based on its legal duty to provide a safe environment.
- Irreparable Harm: The School demonstrated a credible threat that could not be addressed adequately through other legal remedies.
- Balance of Harms: The injunction minimally impacted Yarbrough, especially as he no longer worked at or had children attending the School.
- Public Interest: The Court highlighted the heightened importance of protecting schools from threats, particularly those referencing weapons.
The Court also found that the permanent injunction was warranted given Yarbrough’s history of threatening behavior and the lack of any adequate alternative remedy. The injunction did not prohibit Yarbrough from using public roads near the School, and any potential harm to him was outweighed by the School’s need to ensure safety.
Yarbrough v. Sacred Heart Cath. Sch. Of Hattiesburg (App. Jan. 14, 2025) 2025 Miss. App. LEXIS 26.
Note: This decision is a good reminder that schools have the option to seek injunctive relief in extraordinary circumstances, including in response to credible threats against their community.