Jackson Jambalaya

 A Hartsfield Academy parent sued the Midsouth Association of Independent Schools after MAIS banned him from his son's basketball games.  MAIS banned several parents for the remainder of the basketball season after a confrontation between players, fans, and families at the end of the game. 

Mark Wilson petitioned the Rankin County Chancery Court to issue a temporary restraining order and permanent injunction on against the MidSouth Association of Independent Schools on December 11, 2025.  

Hartfield Academy opened the 2025-2026 basketball season at home against Oak Forest Academy, an Amite, La. private school, on November 4. A brouhaha broke out near the end of the game (as shown in the video included in this post.)  The complaint claims: 

Near the conclusion of the game in which Hartfield was leading by a substantial margin, one of Oak Forest's players abruptly called timeout to stop the game and proceeded to charge Hartfield's student section aggressively. The player was clearly looking for a fight. Within a matter of seconds, the father, mother, adult brother, and grandfather of the Oak Forest player proceeded to leave the visitors' bleachers, came onto the playing floor and also attempted to engage the Hartfield student section. Fortunately, the Oak Forest coaches managed to physically restrain the adult brother and grandfather, both of whom continued to try and escape the coaches' grasp in order to engage the student section. At that time, the Hartfield players were still on the playing floor and in the vicinity of the Oak Forest player and his family.

The plaintiff stated he decided to "monitor" the situation: 

6. As the incident progressed and as the family of the Oak Forest player attempted to engage the Hartfield student section, Plaintiff Mark Wilson casually and calmly walked down the aisle of the lower level of the Hartfield home bleachers to monitor the incident. Plaintiffs son, xxxxxx xxxxxx, was one of the Hartfield players still in the vicinity of the fray but not directly involved in the conflict at any time. Plaintiff Mark Wilson never left the Hartfield bleachers or attempted to engage in the incident at this time. As the incident seemed to be concluding, Plaintiff Mark Wilson encouraged the student section to continue cheering for the remainder of the game by waiving his arms up and down.

7. Subsequently, while being escorted out of the building along the sideline of the court, the father of the Oak Forest player changed course and walked across the middle of the playing floor screaming, cussing, and pointing at the Hartfield home fans. As this was occurring, Plaintiff Mark Wilson again did not react and simply watched the Oak Forest player's father. However, the Oak Forest player's father abruptly turned from the Hartfield fans toward the Hartfield bench, where Hartfield's players and coaches were huddled. The Oak Forest player's father then began walking towards the bench aggressively while pointing, screaming, and cussing. At that time, while feeling that his son and the other Hartfield players were in danger, Plaintiff Mark Wilson addressed the Oak Forest player's father and told him to leave the gym. Plaintiff Mark Wilson and the Oak Forest player's father began hollering at each other and, as emotions escalated, began walking towards each other. The Oak Forest player also charged Mr. Wilson and interjected himself into the conflict between Plaintiff and his father. All involved were held back by others and the altercation did not result in physical contact.

Mr. Wilson defended his actions: 

8. The total verbal interaction between Plaintiff Mark Wilson and the Oak Forest player's father was eighteen seconds. The Oak Forest player's family members were on the playing floor for two full minutes and were instigators and escalators of the incident. In contrast, Plaintiff Mark Wilson never entered the playing floor, never touched anyone, and only acted with the intention of protecting his son and the Hartfield players after the father of the Oak Forest player attempted to aggressively engage them.

MSAIS was not amused and banned Mr. Wilson from attending any Hartfield Academy basketball games for the rest of the season.  The complaint states the father of the Oak Forest player received the same treatment.  The plaintiff protested the unfairness of it all: 

Plaintiff's son is Hartfield's leading scorer and best player. Surprisingly, Plaintiff Mark Wilson's punishment from the MAIS was the same as that issued to the Oak Forest player's father and adult brother. The equal punishment issued to the three is arbitrary and capricious given that the Oak Forest player's father and brother had to be physically restrained from charging the Hartfield student section, entered the playing floor and remained there for two full minutes, and the father aggressively threatened the Hartfield players and coaches. Further, upon information and belief, the Oak Forest player's father has been ejected from multiple other MAIS events previously.

10. More shocking is that the grandfather of the Oak Forest player-who entered the playing surface, had to be restrained from charging the Hartfield student section, and remained on the playing surface for two minutes-was only banned from attending MAIS events until January 1, 2026. The MAIS's decision to ban Plaintiff Mark Wilson for double the time of the grandfather of the Oak Forest player is arbitrary and capricious.

The complaint calls the the banning of Mark Wilson from all basketball games "arbitrary."  It charges MAIS did not conduct an investigation other than watching videos.  The association did not interview Mr. Wilson. 

The plaintiff accuses the defendant of violating due process and breaching the contract MAIS has with Hartsfield Academy. 

MAIS held a virtual meeting the day after the basketball game to discuss the incident and sanction the parents in question.  Mr. Wilson appealed and another virtual hearing was held on November 11. The Wilsons were not allowed to participate in the appeal hearing.  The sanctions were upheld.  Mr. Wilson appealed to the full Athletics & Activities Committee.  A hearing was held on December 2 but the Wilsons were again not allowed to participate.  

Mark Wilson states he has missed twelve of his son's basketball games, thus depriving his son of his father's basketball games for a third of the season. 

The complaint asks the Chancellor to strike the sanctions against Mark Wilson, declare MAIS's procedure used to sanction the plaintiff violated MAIS policies, and enter a temporary restraining order against MAIS.  

MAIS fired right back with a response to Mark Wilson's barrage of accusations and moved to dismiss the petition. MAIS defended the sanctions: 

The Plaintiff was the subject of the directive issued to Hartfield Academy due to his conduct at the game. During the game, a confrontation arose involving players and parents. Initially, Plaintiff was seated in the stands and was not a part of the confrontation. The confrontation did not involve the Plaintiffs son. Despite no direct involvement in the confrontation, the Plaintiff chose to insert himself into the confrontation contributing to the continuation and escalation of the confrontation. The Plaintiff inserted himself into the confrontation despite efforts to restrain him. After a review of evidence gathered concerning the game, MAIS issued a directive to Hartfield to ban the Plaintiff from attending any further games Two other individuals connected with Oak Forest Academy were also the subject of a directive issued to Oak Forest for identical season bans.

MAIS argues in its motion the plaintiff has no standing to sue the Association.  Mr. Wilson is not a member of MAIS nor is he a "party to any contract with MAIS."  The defendants cites the MAIS handbook:  

The Handbook provides that ""Member schools agree to abide by all AAC rules and adjudications,"" and that MAIS "is an association of schools." (Doc. 1-1 p. 17) Critically, it states: ""individual parents do not have any standing when it comes to rules, policies, and adjudications."" (Doc. 1-1 p. 17) The Handbook further makes clear that only heads of school or designated administrators may initiate appeals, and that ""Parents of children involved in an issue will not be allowed to come before the committee," though they may submit written information to their school for consideration.

The MAIS handbook allows an appeal but the Headmaster of the school must appeal the sanctions, not the parent.  MAIS argues Hartfield has not exhausted its appeal since it has not yet appealed the suspension to the Executive Committee.   The defendant claims the only remedy available to Hartfield is to leave MAIS. 

MAIS was not through with Mark Wilson as the motion uses his own words against him: 

Plaintiffs own factual account in his Petition admits that, as the Oak Forest father approached the Hartfield bench, Plaintiff "addressed" him, the two ""began hollering at each other," and then ""began walking towards each other"" as emotions escalated, causing others to restrain the situation. Those admitted facts describe an adult spectator intentionally inserting himself into an escalating confrontation and moving toward another spectator in a volatile environment near players and coaches. An examination of the video clearly shows Plaintiff leaving his seat in the upper portion of the bleachers despite attempts by other spectators to restrain him. Plaintiff inflamed the situation and purposely inserted himself into the confrontation. Under the Handbook's stated objectives of maintaining sportsmanship and discipline at athletic contests, the issuance of a season ban to an adult spectator who became an active participant in a confrontation is reasonable and consistent with the authority to suspend participation/attendance depending on incident circumstances.

Attorney John Hooks of Adams & Reese represent MAIS. Autumn Sills, Esq. of the Holaday Law Firm represents Mark Wilson.  The case is assigned to Chancellor Haydn Roberts. 

Judge Roberts held a hearing on the petition yesterday but has not posted his decision. 

Note: Posted below: Petition, Response & Motion to Dismiss, Response to Motion to Dismiss