A federal lawsuit alleges that two county school boards imposed sweeping bans on a community member, barring him from attending public meetings, school events, and even interacting with students or staff under threat of criminal prosecution. The suit claims these actions have deprived the individual of his constitutional rights and significantly harmed his reputation and daily life.
The complaint was filed by Hal Wright in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina on April 14, 2026, naming the Stokes County Board of Education and Surry County Board of Education as defendants.
According to court documents, Hal Wright is a longstanding resident involved in supporting local public school athletic programs in Mount Airy, Stokes County, and Surry County. He served as a volunteer coach for youth sports through the YMCA, coached travel soccer teams across North Carolina, officiated games as a certified referee at various levels, and regularly attended athletic events to support student-athletes including his grandchildren. The filing states that throughout his involvement he “has never been the subject of any complaint, disciplinary action, or concern” prior to recent events.
The dispute began in winter 2019 when Wright anonymously gave gifts to a student-athlete. The student’s family reported these gifts to law enforcement out of concern for their purpose. When questioned by authorities, Wright admitted sending them with “magnanimous spirit.” After being informed that his actions were misinterpreted, he ceased contact with the student. In December 2020, Wright was charged with misdemeanor stalking; however, this charge was dismissed by the District Attorney on January 9, 2025 and expunged from public record on March 10, 2025.
Following these events but before dismissal of charges became public record, superintendents from both county school systems issued letters banning Wright from all school properties and functions indefinitely. On September 19, 2022 Superintendent Travis Reeves (Surry County Schools) delivered a letter prohibiting any contact between Wright and students or staff (excluding immediate family), citing alleged inappropriate conduct including sending gifts to students. A similar letter was sent by Superintendent Phillip Bradley Rice (Stokes County Schools) on September 21, 2022. Both letters threatened legal action if violated.
Wright asserts that neither board contacted him prior to imposing these bans nor provided notice of specific allegations or an opportunity to respond. He also states there was no identified policy or law cited as justification for exclusion nor any process described for challenging or appealing the decision: “Defendants’ letters did not identify any policy…by which Mr. Wright could challenge…the bans imposed against him.” The complaint further notes that subsequent efforts by Wright’s attorney Jay Vannoy in May and July 2025—providing evidence that charges had been dismissed—were unsuccessful in having the bans lifted.
The filing describes how these restrictions extend beyond physical presence at schools: “On threat of criminal prosecution, the bans prohibit Mr. Wright from having any contact or communication whatsoever with any student or staff member associated with Surry County Schools or Stokes County Schools.” According to Wright’s account in court documents, this has forced him to avoid community spaces such as grocery stores and restaurants out of fear he might inadvertently violate the ban.
Wright alleges significant reputational harm resulted from both social media commentary about him following dissemination of information related to his case and visible postings at schools regarding his exclusion: “Individuals have publicly labeled him a ‘sexual predator’ and a ‘creep,’…and others have gone so far as to post his home address and issue threats against him online.” He claims these perceptions led to loss of personal relationships within the community where he was previously well known.
Legally, Wright argues that both boards violated his procedural due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment by failing to provide notice or opportunity for hearing before imposing indefinite exclusions from public forums open by law: “Defendants violated Mr. Wright’s procedural due process rights when they indefinitely banned him…without providing him notice…or any meaningful opportunity to be heard.” He also contends that these actions infringe upon First Amendment protections related to speech, assembly, association, and petition because they prevent participation in board meetings—a recognized limited public forum—and other community activities.
The lawsuit requests several forms of relief: declarations that defendants’ actions were unconstitutional; orders rescinding all bans; compensatory damages for reputational harm; nominal damages; costs; attorneys’ fees; injunctive relief preventing future similar conduct; and any other remedies deemed appropriate by the court.
Attorneys named include Jay Vannoy (former counsel) who corresponded with defendants on behalf of Mr. Wright prior to this filing. No judge is explicitly named in available documents. The case is identified as Case No.: 1:26-cv-00342.
Source: 126cv00342_Wright_v_Stokes_Board_of_Education_Complaint_Middle_District_North_Carolina.pdf
