Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Richard Tipton
In this scenario Ray Knight, a middle school student with issues with his attendance is
suspended for three days due to unexcused absences. The school had neglected to contact Ray’s
parents via phone contact, and only informed his parents via written notice. On the first day of
suspension, while at a friend’s house Ray is shot accidentally. The following question is what
First, we have to look at the school’s standpoint, how can they be held liable for
something that happened off of school grounds? Mitchell v. Cedar Rapids Community School
District Deals with the sexual assault of a student that happened off school grounds outside of
school time. In this case the courts ruled in favor of the district stating it was not under
supervision of the school, therefore they could not be held liable. This was determined due to this
Fundamentally though the school has no true liability in the situation since it was off of
school grounds, and they could fall back on immunity, as the school district cannot be held
school entity using immunity to remove liability of a situation that members of a school entity
cannot be held liable for damages that are not caused as of direct consequence of their actions.
Now we must look at the side of Ray’s family, where they had no idea that Ray was
under suspension due to inadequate communication from the school. If we look at Flanagan v.
Canton we see that injury caused to a student via peers can be held accountable by the school
even if a faculty member is not present at that point in time. If there is reasonable cause to
believe a student may be harmed in any way by another student by looking at behaviors in the
classroom or on campus. It is evident Roy has some issues with truancy, which may also stem
Artifact 3 Tort & Liability 3
from other behavioral issues, therefore the school should assume that on a suspension he may get
A case to look at is Hoyem v. Manhattan Beach City Sch. Dist In this case, a mother was
seeking action due to her son Michael being hit by a vehicle at a public intersection while he was
leaving school at a time he was not supposed to while it was still in session. The court mentioned
an important factor here, that the school can only supervise so much, and that it is only liable in a
situation where it was lack of supervision that caused the injury. Due to Michael, not being
properly supervised he was injured at a crosswalk after leaving school grounds, he was able to
exit due to lack of supervision. The similarities in this situation to the one Roy is in allow us a bit
more clarity. The school could have provided more supervision by informing the family via
phone like they are supposed to, or by scheduling a meeting to talk about Roy’s attendance
Personally, I believe the courts would rule in favor of Roy and his family. The school did
not meet its duty of informing the students family of issues regarding attendance, and suspending
him without proper notice to the parents. Even though it happened off of school grounds, it was
on a day and time that Roy would have been in school if he was not suspended. Roy’s parents
would have also been able to put more preparations for the suspension in place had the school
References
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ia-supreme-court/1635949.html
Justia US lawbase, Hoyem v. Manhattan Beach City Sch. Dist Retrieved September 22, 2017
http://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/3d/22/508.html
22, 2017
Osborne, Jill K Esq. Teacher Tort Liability Retrieved September 22, 2017
http://www.udallshumway.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Teacher-Tort-Liability.pdf
https://www.leagle.com/decision/citedcases/20011463782so2d68111400
Underwood, J.D, Webb, L.D, Upper saddle River, NJ, Columbus OH, School law for teachers,