Uncategorized

Safety Law News for November 14, 2025

by  • 

— In Louisiana, the Court of Appeal of Louisiana reversed the dismissal of a case involving a teacher who was “suddenly and violently attacked by minor child… who was a third grade student at the school.”  The injuries arose out of a series of concerning behaviors by a student who “was prone to sudden, unprovoked, angry, violent outbursts.”  On the same day the teacher was victimized, the student  “caused another student injury when he hit the student while eating, which caused the student’s cheek to be punctured with a fork.”  The teacher filed suit, alleging that “the Board was vicariously liable for the acts and/or omissions of its administrators and employees…(and) that the Board’s administrators and employees’ flagrant disregard for the risks posed by E.L. were intentional and within the ambit of their assigned duties.”  The lower court dismissed the case, holding that the school officials were entitled to immunity, namely, that the claims against the Board are barred by (state law), and (the teacher) has not alleged sufficient facts to make these claims fall under an exception and will not be able to do so.”  The appellate court reversed because  state law, effectively waives immunity “where the plaintiff’s petition alleged the defendants intended to injure him or should have known his injury was substantially certain to follow, the merit of his claim was a factual determination to be considered upon a motion for summary judgment or a trial on the merits.”  Therefore, the injured teacher “stated a cause of action against the Board.” Bernier v. St. Tammany Parish School Board

— In Michigan, schools across the state are suing the Michigan legislature for setting “aside $321 million for safety and mental health initiatives in local schools as part of the state budget approved last month, but (with) strings attached to the earmark.”  The lawsuit alleges that “legislators unconstitutionally leveraged essential funds by requiring schools waive certain legal protections to receive their cut of appropriations.”

— A new empirical study on behavioral threat assessments in schools reports that “nearly every public K-12 school in the United States used a behavioral threat assessment management (BTAM) team.”  However,  “many schools do not have supporting written materials.”

— Nationally, “Arkansas, Tennessee, and Utah are the first states to enact laws that require public schools to teach children as young as 5 the basics of gun safety and how to properly store guns in the home. Only Utah’s law allows students to opt out of the lesson if requested by parents or guardians.”

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for November 7, 2025

by  • 

— In Indiana, the Court of Appeals of Indiana reversed the conviction of a person who sent a Snapchat direct message “now that I’ve showered and washed my sins away I can go and shoot up a preschool.”  The prosecution arose when “Snapchat flagged the message and notified the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) National Threat Operations Center (NTOC),2 who notified an FBI field office.”  Although the defendant agreed that “it was dumb to do” and that “he should not have sent the message,” he was charged and convicted of Level 6 felony intimidation.  On appeal, the defendant argued that the evidence was insufficient to convict him.  The appellate court agreed, ruling that “to prove (the defendant) committed Level 6 felony intimidation as charged, the State was required to prove that he communicated a threat with the intent that another person be placed in fear that the threat will be carried out, and the threat was to commit a forcible felony.”  The applicable rule of law is that “a “true threat” requires two necessary elements: that the speaker intend his communications to put his targets in fear for their safety, and that the communications were likely to actually cause such fear in a reasonable person similarly situated to the target… the statement must be transmitted in such a way that the defendant knows or has good reason to believe the statement will reach the victim.”  Therefore, the appellate court reversed the conviction, ruling that because the defendant  “sent the message to a private Snapchat group of about twenty individuals who exchanged what he described as dark humor, (and) there was no evidence that anyone in that Snapchat group had a connection to any preschool (such that) there was no … person associated with the nearby preschool – or for that matter any preschool – who was in fact placed in fear by the message.”  Lester v. State

— In North Carolina,  Wake County school officials are being trained on a new safety response system that replaces the ‘code red’ system.   The Standard Response Protocol “uses action words, such as “lockdown,” to make directions more clear.”

— In Washington State, the Seattle citizens approved City of Seattle Proposition No. 1.  “The 6-year, $1.3 billion levy will double access to affordable childcare, expand mental health and student safety services in schools, provide up to two years of free tuition at Seattle Colleges for all graduating seniors at public high schools, and expand career pathways to help more students enter the skilled trades.”

— In California, the legislature is enacting a new policy that expands disclosure for school employees known for endangering campus safety.  Senate Bill 848 will take effect January 1, 2026, requiring private and public schools to release employment records pertaining to “egregious misconduct.”  Previous law did not authorize disclosure unless and until an inquiry was made.  It also “requires an applicant for a noncertificated position at a school district, county office of education, charter school, state special school or diagnostic center operated by the department, or any position at a private school to provide their prospective employer with a complete list of every educational institution at which the employee has been employed.”        

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for November 6, 2025

by  • 

— In Mississippi, the Supreme Court of Mississippi, affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by the family “of a school resource officer, who was struck and killed by a vehicle while directing traffic in course of his employment.”  The incident involved “a motorist, who was driving northbound and over the posted speed limit, who collided with the back of (the officer’s) car, which had been parked in the roadway to help direct traffic” at the end of the school day.  The job description included this daily task.  The collision resulted in (the officer) being struck by his vehicle and severely injured.” He “was taken to a hospital, where he died a few days later.”  The family filed a negligence claim against the state, “alleging that it had failed to maintain, inspect, and repair the traffic signal and that it had failed to warn of a dangerous condition.”  The appellate court affirmed the dismissal because of the long-standing rule of law that work-related injuries covered by workers compensation preempt negligence lawsuits.  This form of immunity “applies to all state government entities … if the employee … of any state governmental entity … is injured in the course and scope of his employment and the state governmental entity for which the injured employee worked at the time of the injury provides worker’s compensation benefits for the injury.”  The court reasoned that it was not unconstitutional for the legislature to make the workers’ compensation act the exclusive remedy of injured workers. Neither the Remedy Clause of State Constitution nor the Equal Protection Clause canceled the state policy.  The court opined that “(the family is) only entitled to the remedy afforded to (the officer) if he had survived. Since (state law) provides him no remedy, so it also prevents a suit by his heirs.”  Patterson v. State ex rel. Fitch

— In North Carolina, “Wake County high schoolers will be asked their opinions on school safety in a survey set for next month.  The survey … will ask students about how schools can be safer, whether they feel safe now, and whether they’re likely to report concerns using existing reporting channels, such as the Say Something reporting app.”

— In Ohio, the legislature has earmarked “$9 million in grants for safety-related projects for the 2026-2027 academic year.”  The funds may be used for “certification training for school resource officers, active-shooter response training or equipment…(and) training to identify and assist students with mental health issues.”

— In North Carolina, “every SRO in Nash County will have access to a breaching shotgun, a weapon designed to break through locks and reach students quickly in an emergency.” “The addition of breaching shotguns is part of a broader push in Nash County to give school resource officers more tools to protect students. All SROs in the district were recently trained on ballistic shields as well.”

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for October 31, 2025

by  • 

— In Pennsylvania, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the arrest and conviction of a person who “refused to leave the school as directed to by police.”  The dispute arose when the person  went to the school “to speak to the principal and deliver paperwork to make the school administration aware of the change in masking requirements, stating that the mask requirement was unconstitutional… (The person) was asked to put on a mask, but refused… (the person) refused to leave the building…(stating that) he had a right to be inside the school because he paid taxes.”  The school resource officers “viewed (the person) as a possible safety threat… and began to escort (the person) out of the school, telling him multiple times that he would have to leave the premises.”  One officer “attempted to pull (the person) out the door while (the person) pushed back and attempted to remain inside. (The person) attempted to get back into the school and began wrestling with the two officers.”  It took both officers “to take (the person) to the ground outside the building… (where he) was handcuffed and informed that he was under arrest.”  The person challenged “the authority of the school police officers to arrest him, the sufficiency of the evidence for his convictions, and also claims that the guilty verdicts (were) contrary to the weight of the evidence provided.”  The appellate court, affirming the “convictions for resisting arrest, defiant trespass, disorderly conduct, and harassment,” ruled that the person “was not removed from the school building because he refused to wear a mask; he was removed from the building because he did not have an appointment with any school personnel and thus had no legitimate reason to be on the premises.”  As to the duties of school resource officers, the appellate court held that a “school police officer appointed under section 1302-C(b) shall possess and exercise all the following powers and duties: (1) To enforce good order in school buildings, on school buses and on school grounds in the respective school entities.”  The appellate court summarized the rule of law for trespass onto school property: “(a person) may have thought that he had a right to be on the property, but once he was told that he could not remain in the building without an appointment, any right to remain clearly ceased.”  Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Bettis

— In Florida, the Columbia County School Board is deploying a K-9 team from the Columbia County Sheriff’s Office to its high school.  The canine is “uniquely trained in the detection of basic explosives, gunpowder, gun oils, and gun parts.”

— In New York, officials in the New York City are “launching the nation’s first Emergency Alert System that links schools directly to 911, ensuring help can be initiated within seconds.”  The new protocol will provide each school “with multiple fixed buttons and wireless lanyards that can trigger a hard lockdown alert. Once activated, a signal goes directly to 911 dispatch in under 10 seconds, straight to the NYPD’s real-time operations.”

— In Texas, officials in the Boerne ISD are deploying drones to enhance response times in an active shooter situation.  Officials state that “when the drones are deployed, a team of highly skilled pilots uses virtual reality and cameras to navigate around a school.”  As to response, “the goal is for the drones to confront a school shooter within 15 seconds.”  The drones are equipped to “use loud sirens, flashing lights, pepper balls and even direct strikes to distract a threat.”

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for October 21, 2025

by  • 

— In Pennsylvania, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the denial of immunity to school officials for the failure to maintain a safe learning environment.  The case arose from a sexual assault on campus that occurred during an after-school program when “a male student approached (the victim) while she walked down the hallway during a District after-school program. The student invited (the victim) into the men’s restroom, where he sexually assaulted her.”  The student “sued the District for negligence and negligent infliction of emotional distress,” arguing that “that District had a duty to protect (her) from harm while (she was) under the District’s supervision.”  The school asserted immunity, arguing that it had “no duty to protect students from unanticipated harm from fellow students.”  The trial court denied the assertion of immunity.  The appellate court agreed.  “The relevant question is whether the District realized or should have realized the likelihood that such a situation might be created where a third party could commit a crime against (a student).”  The rule of law is that “one well-settled common-law duty is a school’s duty to maintain a safe environment for students.”  Applied to these facts, the appellate court ruled that immunity did not apply.  “The District held an after-school program, at which it represented it would supervise the attending students, and thus should have taken reasonable steps to protect (students) from harm.”  Moreover, the court ruled that “because the District was aware of three prior incidents, the District could foresee harm to (the victim).”  L.B. v. Leechburg Area School District

— In Michigan, “the Michigan State Police (MSP) Office of School Safety has released three new School Safety Toolkits.  Developed with federal funding, the toolkits are available online and aim to keep school communities informed, prepared and responsive.”

— In North Carolina, officials in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools “announced on that they would be implementing new safety protocols for certain games or athletic events.” The new procedures include “no tickets will be allowed for purchase at the game site, ticket caps, additional security personnel or law enforcement, limited entry or exit points, separate concession stands, and attendance limitations.

— In Wisconsin, officials in the Green Bay schools are revising school security procedures “after authorities discovered a student at Preble High School had a loaded gun in his backpack… One of the new security measures included clear backpacks for middle and high school students.”

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for October 17, 2025

by  • 

— In Ohio, the Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed the adjudication of a student for possessing “a deadly weapon in a school zone,” discovered by a non-sworn SRO “while performing a hand-held wand scan and pat down of his person as part of the school’s standard entry procedure.”  The student argued that the evidence should suppressed as an unlawful search constrained by the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  The high school “had a written policy for daily weapons searches in order to protect students and staff.”  Ordinarily, “students walked through a security checkpoint that included a bag check and metal detection screening.”  One the day of the arrest, “the school’s metal detector was inoperable.”  The so-called SRO, a non-sworn staff member, instead set out to “simultaneously pat down each student while performing the hand-held wand scan.”  The SRO “discovered a firearm in (the student’s) waistband while performing a hand-held wand scan and pat down of his person…(the weapon was) in (the student’s) waistband from the pat-down search.”  Both the lower court and the appellate court upheld the search, refusing to suppress the evidence.  Applying the rule of law in the seminal case of New Jersey v. T.L.O., the appellate court admitted that “there was no individualized suspicion that led (the) SRO … to search (the student’s) person.  Even so, however, the court held that “this search falls within the general category of “administrative searches,” as it was conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme in furtherance of an administrative purpose, rather than as part of an investigation to secure evidence of a crime or violation of a school rule.”  The standard for evaluating this type of school search policy comes from the U.S. Supreme Court cases of Vernonia School Dist. 47J v. Acton, and Board of Education v. Earls.  These cases validate the search because the policy “supports the compelling governmental interest in public school safety by helping to ensure the contents of students’ bags and what they carry on their persons are not dangerous and that students, teachers, and faculty are safe from physical harm.”  In the Matter of K.P.

— In Florida, the Hillsborough County School District is moving to shut down the Walton Academy Charter School for “ongoing and unresolved security failures.”  Numerous safety related failures have been documented by the school board and the Florida Department of Education including “failures in the emergency alert system, staff training, safety drills and the lack of designated “safe areas” for shelter during emergencies.”

— A new empirical study on behavioral threat assessments and school safety concludes that BTA “can support students and reduce exclusionary discipline practices, including disparities.”  The threat assessment teams must be properly trained and must commit to using the evidence-based science to assess concerning behaviors.

— In Arizona, audits by the Arizona Department of Education suggest that Arizona schools are failing state mandated safety plan standards.  “A new state audit shows many campuses remain dangerously unprepared for active shooter events, natural disasters and other emergencies.”