Uncategorized

Safety Law News for May 8th, 2019

by  • 

• In Vermont, the Supreme Court ruled that educators were not liable after a student committed suicide as a result of being assaulted by his teammates on the school football team.  The court held that schools owe students a duty of ordinary care and could not be held liable for injuries that a reasonable person could not have foreseen or anticipated. The school’s complete lack of notice of a pattern of hazing by team members was determinative. (Stopford v. Milton Town School District)

• In Ohio, the United States Court of Appeals ruled that the use of a body sock on a special needs student who fell while in body sock, injuring his front teeth,  constituted a “seizure” for purposes of an excessive force claim.  Nevertheless, the court held that the teacher did not violate the rights of the student because the sock was designed specifically as a therapeutic tool and was not excessive under the circumstances. 

(Crochran through Shields v. Columbus City Schools)

• In Maine, the United States District Court ruled that a high school student would be allowed to pursue a federal law claim based on Title IX for peer-on-peer sexual harassment against school officials.  The court held that the facts of the victim’s case fell within the scope of the law.  A school is liable under Title IX when it does nothing to stop known incidents of harassment and assault. (Education Amendments of 1972 § 901, 20 U.S.C.A. § 1681(a).)  (McCann on behalf of J.M. v. York School Department)

• In New York, the Supreme Court held that a school did not breach the special duty owed to a student who was struck by an automobile while crossing the street leaving school.  The court ruled that the school could not be liable when an accident occurs so quickly that even the most intense supervision could not have prevented it.  The crossing guard told the student not to cross the street at the unsafe location and pointed student to the nearest crosswalk.  But the student crossed the street in the middle of the block where there was no intersection or crosswalk and no traffic device affording her right-of-way.  (K.A. v. City of New York)

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for May 2, 2019

by  • 

• In California, the California Court of Appeal ruled that school officials may search the cell phone of a student when they have a reasonable belief that school rules have been violated.  The court affirmed the trial court ruling that the student’s cell phone was lawfully seized and searched when video recordings of female students in the locker room were posted on the Internet.  (In re Adrian O)

• In Alabama, the Supreme Court of Alabama held that state law does not make a school board or its members an arm of the state for purposes of Eleventh Amendment immunity for violating the federal civil rights of students.  The court ruled that while board members were entitled to qualified immunity in their individual capacities from the federal civil rights claim, they are not immune in their official capacity from lawsuits challenging school policies under federal law.  Parents of the student filed an excessive force lawsuit after a teacher assaulted their child.  (Ex parte Wilcox County Board of Education)

• In California, the California Court of Appeal ruled that state law protects a school district from liability for injuries resulting from the negligence of other persons or organizations using school facilities.  The court affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit by a parent who suffered serious injuries when he fell off an inflatable slide while attending a carnival held at the school sponsored by a community group and the parent-teacher association (PTA). (Grossman v. Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District)

• In Indiana, the Court of Appeals of Indiana ruled that school officials are not entitled to immunity under state law in a wrongful-death lawsuit.  The court reversed a ruling by the trial court that dismissed a case involving a student who left school in mid-day and was murdered.  Parents argued that the school was liable for failing to properly supervise and monitor their child.  The appellate court held that the school could be liable if it was aware of the student’s truancy and his status as a runaway, and failed to supervise him properly.  (Murray v. Indianapolis Public Schools)

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for April 25, 2019

by  • 

In Louisiana, the Court of Appeal of Louisiana held that schools have a duty to provide reasonable, competent supervision appropriate to the age of the students. The court reversed the dismissal of a lawsuit by parents of a kindergartner who fractured her arm during recess on the playground. The court ruled that the central question in supervision cases is whether the supervision provided is reasonable considering the age of the children and the attendant circumstances, and whether the accident/incident could have been prevented. (Robinson v. St. John the Baptist Parish School Board).

In California, the California Court of Appeal held that schools have a duty to supervise the conduct of the children on the school grounds and to enforce those rules necessary to their protection.  The court reversed the dismissal of a lawsuit by parents of a middle-school student who was sexually abused by a teacher with a history of sexual battery accusations.  The court reasoned that liability could be based on the fact that educators failed to adequately supervise the teacher and failed to follow school policy.  (C.A. v. Los Angeles Unified School District).

In Florida,  Polk County Public Schools Superintendent announced Tuesday that the district will continue to place armed guardians and school resource officers in the district’s 150 schools, rather than arm teachers.  Current Florida law allows the arming of school staff other than classroom teachers.  The Florida Senate passed a bill (SB 7030)  proposing an amendment to allow for the arming of teachers in the state.

In Texas, the Coppell Independent School District is implementing multiple new safety and security measures. Among the changes are measures that encourage parents to be aware and involved in their students’ school safety experience.

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for April 23, 2019

by  • 

In Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that negligence by school officials that renders the campus unsafe fall within the exception to governmental immunity.  The school was found liable for injuries to a student participating in a relay race during gym class who tripped and fell, causing him to propel into the wall at the end of the gym.  (Brewington for Brewington v. City of Philadelphia)

In Alabama, Senate Bill 255 and House Bill 209 were approved the Senate.  If enacted retired law enforcement officers will qualify to become school resource officers without having to be certified, as is currently required of school resource officers. Each retired officer must have at least 25 years of experience and been retired in good standing.

In New York, the New York Supreme Court ruled that schools may be held liable for injuries related to the absence of adequate supervision.  Liability for injuries to a student beaten on a school bus would be appropriate if the perpetrator’s disciplinary record placed the school on notice.  The court held that the standard for determining whether a school has breached its duty is to compare the school’s supervision and protection to that of a parent of ordinary prudence placed in the same situation and armed with the same information.  (Palopoli v. Sewanhaka Central High School District)

In Indiana, the Board of Education for the Clark-Pleasant Community School Corporation is creating its own police department, which will supplement the school resource officers already in place.  The district plans to spend about $650,000 annually on salary and benefits for the school’s officers, as well as the new director and an administrative assistant.

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for April 19, 2019

by  • 

In Michigan, the U. S. District Court held that parents of a seven-year-old child with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder were entitled to sue a school resource officer and the City for placing the child in handcuffs in response to a disability-induced episode.  The court held that liability is appropriate when police fail to train its officers on appropriately interacting with juveniles who may have a disability.  Intentional discrimination may be inferred from the likelihood that inadequate training will result in a violation of federally protected rights. (McCadden v. City of Flint)

In Massachusetts, the United States District Court held that police had probable cause to arrest a student who posted threatening messages using a school computer. Massachusetts law makes it a crime to “communicate… a threat thereby causing either the evacuation or serious disruption of a school… or serious public inconvenience or alarm.”  Massachusetts Rev. Stat. 269, § 14.  The court reasoned that police could reasonably have inferred that an attack would take place at the high school, since the post appeared to be directed toward fellow students.  (D’Ambrosio v. City of Methuen)

In New York, the New York Supreme Court ruled that parents may sue a school district for  injuries to their child from an attack by fellow students on a school bus.  The court held that schools are under a duty to supervise students and can be held liable for foreseeable injuries related to the absence of adequate supervision.  The court reasoned that a school is bound to take energetic steps to intervene and that a school bus company owes the same duty to the students.  (Williams v. Student Bus Company, Inc.)

In Utah, the Salt Lake City Police Department released a Report by the International Association of Police Chiefs that recommends that rifles be locked in a safe inside schools for easier access by school resource officers in the case of an emergency.

Uncategorized

Safety Law News for April 16, 2019

by  • 

• In Tennessee, the U.S. District Court held that a school district can be liable for failing to protect students from danger when officials fail to intervene to eliminate a dangerous condition.  The court reasoned that the crash of a school bus, in which six students were killed, was connected to the principal’s failure to act in response to multiple complaints that the bus driver drove his school bus in a dangerous fashion. (M.S . by Covington v. Hamilton Cty. Dep’t of Education).

• In New York, the New York Supreme Court held that restrictions limiting a father’s access to school were valid.  The court ruled that the restrictions were rationally related to the in loco parentis authority of the school.  The father was a Level III sex offender convicted of rape against a juvenile, which meant that he posed the highest possible risk.    The restrictions were not a blanket prohibition from entering school but required prior notice and that the father be accompanied by school safety agent.  (Lujan v. Carranza).

• In Michigan, school officials at Mattawan High School are implementing a new policy of searching students found loitering in bathrooms as a means to crack down on e-cigarette use, also known as vaping.  A letter sent to parents gave notice of the intent of educators to send to the administrative office to be searched students who congregate and loiter in the bathroom or multiple students who gather in a closed bathroom stall.

• In Indiana, the Board of Education for the Perry Central Community School Corporation voted to create an in-house, school-based police department.  The goal of the policy is to make the school-based officer more effective in keeping the campus safe, better trained on school law enforcement, and a consistent presence on campus to build rapport with the students.