Uncategorized

Safety Law News for April 1, 2025

by  •  • 0 Comments

— In Alabama, the United States District Court dismissed a case brought by a parent who accused school officials of being deliberately indifferent to sexual harassment and assault which their child was experiencing at school.  The case arose out of a complaint that during the school year the assailant “repeatedly” sexually assaulted their child, including “on a school bus.”  The parent was nonplussed that school officials decided that “homebound services sufficiently disciplined (the assailant) for his actions, protected other students, and deterred future harm.”  The parent alleged that school officials were violating Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.  The trial court disagreed, setting forth the rules, holding that “Title IX funding recipients do not have to ‘remedy’ peer harassment. A Title IX 12 recipient must respond to known peer harassment in a manner that is not clearly unreasonable … a school district (is) not deliberately indifferent to reports of sexual harassment when its officials timely responded to complaints and perform an internal investigation by interviewing the involved parties despite those efforts ultimately being ineffective at remedying the harassment… an official decision by (school officials) not to remedy the violation amounts to deliberate indifference.”  The case was dismissed because, “the evidence … does not present a genuine issue of material fact as to (school official’s) handling of (the) assault …  There is no evidence that school administrators had knowledge of (the assailant’s) conduct before (the reports of the behavior) … When they learned of the assault, school administrators immediately investigated, followed established disciplinary procedures, and disciplined (the assailant).”   Mary Doe v. City of Madison Board of Education

— In Georgia, the legislature is proposing a school safety policy that will require schools “to implement plans for assessing students’ behavior for the risk of threats or violence, but it no longer directs those schools to work with so-called threat management teams.  House Bill 268 also will require “schools to draft detailed maps of their facilities to help first responders navigate buildings in an emergency; share disciplinary records of transfer students within five days; and hire behavioral specialists tasked with coordinating intervention and treatment methods for students with mental health issues.”

— In Colorado, officials in the Denver Public Schools are delaying the plan to install an upgrade to increase security “after a student shot two administrators at Denver’s East High School”  in 2023.”  The plan, to install “a secure vestibule just inside” the school entrance triggered disagreement by some in the community.  School officials will wait “to allow for valuable time to better engage (the) community.”

— In Virginia, the Charlottesville City School Board is returning police officers to its schools.  Removed five years ago, the shift comes as a result of the belief that “(o)ne challenge school administrators have observed over the years is that without police in schools, educators are often forced to manage responsibilities typically handled by law enforcement … Schools end up relying on whichever officer is available that day, instead of having officers they’ve built relationships with.”

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for March 28, 2025

by  •  • 0 Comments

— In Illinois, the Appellate Court of Illinois affirmed the conviction of a parent for criminal trespass for “profanity towards staff and threats towards staff that violated school board policy.”  The superintendent informed the parent – by mail, by email, and by hand-delivery – that “because of her repeated violations of school board policy, she was required to provide 48 hours’ notice to the school building principal or district administrator of her intent to enter school grounds and to receive permission from the principal or administrator before entering, unless she was dropping off or picking up her children.”  The parent was arrested after attempting to attend a school event without the required 48 hours’ notice.  The parent argued that “the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she received notice that she was not to enter (the school) without permission.”  The appellate court affirmed the conviction of the parent, ruling that knowledge “may be inferred from circumstantial evidence, and such inferences are within the province of the fact-finder.”  The court observed that the parent responded to other informational emails concerning her children and school events such that, “it is reasonable to infer, as the trial court did, that (the parent) … also received (notice) that she was forbidden from entering school grounds without permission.”  “After reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, we find that a rational fact-finder could conclude (the parent) received, and knew she received, the no-trespass notice.”  People v. Ward

— In Oregon, the legislature is proposing a panic alarm requirement for all schools. (House Bill 3083). The proposal would require school districts across the state to install panic alarm systems to improve emergency response times in schools.

— In Rhode Island, over two hundred educators from the Woonsocket School District told policymakers that they feel unsafe.  “We, the educators of the 11 public schools in the city … want you to see us and hear us … We want to be safe. Woonsocket educators and the School District have a disagreement right now, but our history has been more collaborative in the past. We’ve had an increased number of dangerous situations in the schools, and we’ve reached out to the Woonsocket Education Department to resolve the problem. Our request was met with silence, no email response, and almost no discussion of possible solutions. … This was a solvable dispute.”

— In West Virginia, officials in the Roane County Schools are installing transparent security film to windows at the high school and middle school.  The film will help prevent break-ins and slow down intruders.

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for March 13, 2025

by  •  • 0 Comments

— In Georgia,  the Court of Appeals of Georgia reversed the dismissal of a case involving an injury to a student, disagreeing that school officials were entitled to official immunity.  The victim, “was stabbed multiple times by a classmate at school.”  “(T)he record shows that (the) School Resource officer … notified the administration … that a student … had a knife at school and was making threats to use the knife to injure fellow students.”  The same notification was given the following school day.  “According to the complaint, (school officials) did not investigate this threat either.  On that day, when (the victim) was walking to the gymnasium, (she was attacked and) was stabbed at least 14 times during the attack.”  The school officials argued, successfully in the lower court, that in “the absence of malice or actual intent to injure, which is not alleged here, public officials are immune from damages that result from their performance of discretionary functions.”  The appellate court disagreed, applying the rule that “immunity for discretionary acts does not extend to ministerial acts.”  Moreover, the appellate court ruled that “a report of bullying triggers a ministerial duty” for school officials to implement school policy that provides that “(a)ny report will be appropriately investigated by the administration based on the nature of the complaint and in a timely manner.”  As a result “(while school policy) leaves it to the administration’s discretion what level of investigation would be appropriate given the nature of the complaint and that the investigation must occur in an undefined timely manner … an investigation is required after a report of bullying … thus the Administrators have not demonstrated entitlement to official immunity.”  Wilson v. Anderson.

— Nationally, the Centegix 2024 National Educator Survey Report “found 84% of respondents affirm school safety directly impacts student achievement and 83% feel their students are concerned for their safety while at school. The survey also revealed 56% of educators lose two or more hours of instructional time weekly due to emergency or safety incidents.”

— In Florida, the Marjory Stoneman Douglas School Safety Commission “may see some legislative clarification of … school safety laws that public safety officers have had trouble interpreting. … HB 1473, requires classrooms and the perimeter of a campus to be locked while students are present. HB 1403 … would allow for doors to be unlocked if they are actively being watched.”

— In New York, “(t)he number of (New York City) school safety agents — unarmed but uniformed New York Police Department employees stationed at schools — has plunged from about 5,000 to 3,600 over the past five years, a roughly 28% drop.”  School officials as well as parents are concerned with the increased risk of harm to students from routine and foreseeable incidents each school day.  “(M)ore than 120 school administrators and staffers who signed an open letter to NYPD and Education Department officials in November (are) calling on the city to hire additional agents.”

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for February 28, 2025

by  • 

— In New York, the New York Supreme Court reversed the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by parents who claimed that educators  “failed to prevent sexual abuse perpetrated by a teacher.”  The teacher in question, “was on ‘probationary’ status” during which “between 50 and 100 (incidents of alleged abuse occurred) over the course of two school years, inter alia, in a classroom and the school parking lot during school hours.”  The lower court dismissed the lawsuit, agreeing with the school that “the School District did not have actual or constructive notice of the teacher’s alleged propensity to engage in sexual abuse.”  The appellate court reversed, holding that “(a)lthough an employer cannot be held vicariously liable for torts committed by an employee who is acting solely for personal motives unrelated to the furtherance of the employer’s business, the employer may still be held liable under theories of negligent hiring, retention, and supervision of the employee.”  Here, “the teacher’s personnel file contains only a single evaluation from the school during the relevant period, and multiple former students testified at their respective depositions that the teacher’s inappropriate relationship with the plaintiff was readily apparent.”  Therefore, the school officials “failed to eliminate triable issues of fact as to whether (they) took appropriate measures to evaluate the teacher’s employment and fitness at the time she was hired.”  Brauner v. Locust Valley Central School District

— In Minnesota, the legislature is proposing a more rigorous school safety policy on public schools.  SF 1318 “would require every school district to have school safety initiatives in their 10-year building maintenance plans. It would also make new funding available for districts to install things like bullet-resistant doors and windows as well as remote lockdown activation systems to streamline communication with law enforcement.”

— In Alabama, the legislature is proposing a change in policy on campus safety at private schools.  Senate Bill 4 authorizes private schools to contract with a police department or sheriff’s office for a school resource officer.  “The bill has passed the House and Senate. It now heads to Gov. Kay Ivey’s desk for her review and signature.”

— In Arizona, House Bill 2074 proposes to eliminate the shortage of available police officers to serve as school resource officers.  It would “qualify retired police officers to be stationed at K-12 schools.”

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for February 21, 2025

by  • 

— In California, the California Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal of a claim asserted by a student who was injured when a teacher fell on the student while breaking up a fight in which the student was involved.  The teacher “immediately intervened to prevent the two boys from hurting themselves or someone else. While pulling the larger boy away from plaintiff – and being hit himself by plaintiff, who continued to throw punches after the other boy stopped—the teacher lost his balance and fell onto plaintiff, breaking plaintiff’s leg.”  The student brought a negligence lawsuit against the teacher and the school district, claiming that “the teacher should not have tried to stop the fight because of his weight and physical condition, and (the teacher) should have done something else, sooner, to prevent the fight…(and) the school district failed to train its teachers how to safely intervene in physical altercations between students.”  The appellate court, affirming the lower court ruling, stated that “the special relationship between school personnel and students under their supervision and control…includes the duty to use reasonable measures to protect students from foreseeable injury at the hands of third parties acting negligently or intentionally… There is no more to say than we have already said about the state of the evidence and the effect of the instructions that were given.”  I.C. v. Compton Unified School District

— Nationally, the Congress is considering setting aside “$100 million in annual funding for school safety upgrades through the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.”  The provisions of H.R. 1335 (The Measures for Safer School Districts Act), would create “a nationwide framework for school security focusing on standardizing emergency response and notification protocols, notifying parents immediately, and reinforcing school infrastructure for maximum protection.”

— In New Mexico, lawmakers have introduced a comprehensive crime package, known as House Bill 8, that would “make a threat of a school shooting a fourth-degree felony.”  State officials are also calling for the “creation of a Department of School Safety and a “czar” who would oversee it.”

— In Kentucky, proposed House Bill 14 “aims to enhance school safety by encouraging the implementation of wearable panic alert systems” in schools across the state.  Schools would “implement “wearable panic alarm” technology…(allowing) teachers to silently alert law enforcement and administrators in emergency situations with the push of a button.”

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for February 18, 2025

by  • 

— In California, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that school officials violated a high school student’s procedural due process rights by extending his suspension without informing him of new misconduct.  The case involved a “lunchtime fight,” after which “(a)ll students involved—after each meeting with various administrators and submitting a written statement about the incident—were suspended for fighting at school and sent home that day.”  Of these students, K,J, was suspended for three days after receiving notice and providing his side of the circumstances surrounding the fight as one of self-defense.  School officials, after watching surveillance videos of the incident, determined that K.J. “did not just participate in the fight but “willfully caused serious injury” to another person not in “self-defense.””  The outcome of school discipline was amended, “extending K.J.’s school suspension from three days to five days,” and recommending him for expulsion.  K.J. was sent suspension/expulsion paperwork.  “At no point did school officials communicate with K.J. about the extended suspension.”  The appellate court quoted from the landmark student rights case of Goss v. Lopez that clearly established law “requires that school officials provide him with (1) oral or written notice of the charges against him, (2) “an explanation of the evidence the authorities have, and (3) an opportunity to present his side of the story.  K.J.’s rights under the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution were violated, “because (school officials) never informed K.J. of the new charges and new evidence that formed the basis of the extended suspension, he did not have a meaningful opportunity to present his side of the story regarding those charges.”  K. J. by & through Johnson v. Jackson

— In Utah, a new bill in the Utah state legislature would teach firearm safety in the classroom as early as kindergarten. Under 4HB 104 (The Firearm Safety in Schools Amendments), “public school students would receive mandatory instruction throughout their K-12 years on how to respond if they encounter a gun. The lessons, which could be presented in a video or by an instructor displaying an actual firearm, would demonstrate best practices for safely handling and storing a gun to prevent accidents.” Supporters of the legislation say, “it’s aimed at preventing accidental shootings by and of young children.”

— Nationally, the “Senate Judiciary Committee… is leading bipartisan lawmakers…to reintroduce the EAGLES Act to prevent acts of mass violence. The bill, named after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School mascot and introduced on the seventh anniversary of the tragic school shooting in Parkland, Florida, would expand the U.S. Secret Service’s National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) to include a greater focus on preventing targeted violence, including school violence.”

— In Kansas, the Kansas State Board of Education approved an updated at-risk program list for use by local school boards and local districts who are required to support evidence based practices by implementing assessments of concerning behaviors by students.  “Beginning with the 2026-27 school year, districts will be required to submit at-risk accountability plans.”