A.C. is a transgender boy who attends Martinsville High School. Prior to attending Martinsville High School, he attended John R. Wooden Middle School (“Wooden Middle”). While attending Wooden Middle, A.C. sought to use the boys’ restroom, the restroom he felt most comfortable using, but was denied access by the School District. The School District offered him the use of the school’s single-sex restroom instead.

A.C. filed the instant lawsuit against the School District, citing Title IX and Equal Protection violations.

The School District designated Dr. Kristopher E. Kaliebe as an expert witness to offer opinions concerning the care of youth with gender dysphoria. Plaintiff A.C. filed a motion to exclude the testimony of Kaliebe while Defendant Metropolitan School District of Martinsville filed a motion to exclude the testimony of James D. Fortenberry, M.D., M.S., who has been disclosed as an expert by Plaintiff.

Psychiatry Expert Witness

Kristopher Edward Kaliebe, MD is a Professor of Psychiatry at University of South Florida, in Tampa Florida. He is Board Certified in Psychiatry, Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Forensic Psychiatry. He is a Distinguished Fellow at the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP). His clinical work has been primarily in University clinics, Federally Qualified Health Centers and juvenile corrections.

Want to know more about the challenges Kristopher Kaliebe has faced? Get the full details with our Challenge Study report.

Adolescent Health Expert Witness

Dr. James Dennis Fortenberry is Professor of Pediatrics at Indiana University School of Medicine. He served as Division Chief from 2015 – 2020. He also holds an adjunct appointment in epidemiology in the Fairbanks School of Public Health and is a member of the Center for Sexual Promotion at Indiana University.

Fortenberry is a member of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, the Society for Adolescent Health & Medicine, the International Academy for Sex Research, the American STD Association, and the Society for Scientific Study of Sex. He is past president of the International Academy for Sex Research, and past-president of the American STD Association, a fellow of the Society for Scientific Study of Sex, and past chair of the Board of Directors of the American Sexual Health association.

Fortify your strategy by reviewing a Challenge Study detailing grounds for excluding James D. Fortenberry’s expert testimony.

Discussion by the Court

A.C.’s Motion to Exclude Testimony of Kaliebe

A.C. argued that Kaliebe is not qualified to render opinions concerning gender dysphoria and social transition, Kaliebe’s opinions generally are not reliable, and Kaliebe’s opinions are irrelevant in assessing the damages caused for the emotional distress and physical discomfort A.C. experienced.

A.C. narrows in on the fact Kaliebe has no clinical experience on the issue at hand in this case – the denial of a form of social transition, restroom usage, to a gender dysphoric youth.

The School District details how Kaliebe’s testimony is relevant (1) to dispute whether their position regarding bathroom access is the cause of any irreparable injury to A.C.; (2) to the balancing harms analysis set forth in the permanent injunction consideration; and (3) to demonstrate that the public’s interest would not be served by a permanent injunction. However, there is no argument as to how this testimony relates to damages.

Given the Court’s granting of the permanent injunction, the merits of the permanent injunction request are no longer an issue for trial. Therefore, the Court decided that Kaliebe’s proposed testimony is no longer relevant.

The School District’s Motion to Exclude Testimony of Fortenberry

The School sought to exclude the testimony of James D. Fortenberry, who opined that A.C. would suffer adverse effects if he is denied continued use of the boys’ restroom. The School District also sought to exclude Fortenberry’s testimony as to the genetic or brain-scan studies suggesting that there is a biological component to gender identity because those are areas outside his alleged expertise.

Fortenberry’s Testimony on Harm Caused to Transgender Youth

A.C. convincingly argued that most of Fortenberry’s testimony is necessary and relevant to demonstrate the types of harm – both physical and emotional – that transgender youth suffer. Fortenberry’s opinion that “forced use of facilities that contravene [A.C.’s] gender experience and identity are reasonably expected to cause adverse effects on relationships with his school, his safety at school, and his mental health” speaks to the harm A.C. experienced when he was denied access to the boys’ restroom prior to this Court’s grant of a preliminary injunction. Similarly, testimony about how youth react to the denial of access to appropriate restrooms and suicidality rates in transgender youth provides relevant background to the harms affiliated with gender dysphoria. A.C. testified that he made comments to his mom about not wanting to live trapped in a female’s body. This testimony is directly related to suicidal ideations in transgender youth.

Fortenberry’s Testimony on Studies Demonstrating there is a Biological Component to Gender Identity

However, A.C. has not successfully demonstrated how Fortenberry’s testimony that “gender expression/identity is not a ‘choice'” or testimony about genetic or brain-scan studies is relevant information that can help a jury understand gender dysphoria as it relates to A.C. specifically. A.C. argued that testimony about brain scans is necessary to explain his opinion that being transgender is not a choice. But A.C. did not explain how transgender status being a choice, opposed to a biological making, makes the harm he faced by the School District’s actions more or less probable. For this reason, the Court barred Fortenberry from discussing whether or not gender identity is a choice and from discussing genetic or brain-scan studies.

The School District also argued that reports of the experiences of other young people with gender dysphoria should be excluded because it is hearsay, confusing to the jury, and unduly prejudicial. Fortenberry may communicate what he observed and heard to establish the basis of his opinion.

Therefore, the Court held that while Fortenberry may testify about the harm caused to transgender youth who are denied the ability to socially transition,
and the suicide rates of transgender youth, he may not testify about whether
transgender status is a choice or studies demonstrating there is a biological component to gender identity.

Held

The Court granted A.C.’s motion to exclude the testimony of Kristopher Kaliebe.

The Court granted in part and denied in part the School District’s motion to exclude the testimony of James Fortenberry.

Key Takeaway:

Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and the fact is of consequence in determining the action. In this case, Fortenberry’s testimony is relevant to demonstrate the type of harms – both physical and emotional – that A.C. was caused by the School District restricting his access to the boys’ restroom. His testimony as to the danger of suicidality in transgender young persons is necessary to demonstrate how serious gender dysphoria is.

Case Details:

Case Caption:	A.C. V. Metropolitan School District Of Martinsville Et Al
Docket Number:	1:21cv2965
Court Name:	United States District Court, Indiana Southern
Order Date:	August 27, 2025

Category: Adolescent Health Expert Witness

Adolescent Health Expert’s Testimony on Brain-Scan Studies Excluded

Adolescent Health Expert’s Testimony on Brain-Scan Studies Excluded