Sei sulla pagina 1di 5

Portfolio 3 1

Artifact #3

Tort and Liability

Sandra Galvan

COLLEGE OF SOUTHERN NEVADA

November 14, 2019


PORTFOLIO 3 2

A Middle school student by the named of Ray Knight, was accidentally shot while at a

friend’s house. Prior to this, the student had been suspended from school for three days due to

unexcused absences. The usual procedures required when a student is suspended is as follows:

The schools must leave a notification by calling and or leaving a message, and to mail a notice

immediately to the home. This middle school had only sent a note home with the student who

had simply discarded it without presenting it to his parents. Because the discarded note was the

only means of notification the parents were not aware of his suspension. The question at hand is

whether Ray’s parents have the grounds to file charges against the school officials. We will begin

with arguing on the parent’s side.

Despite the school districts requiring the parents to be notified by both telephone and

mail the school district only sent a note home with the student. The Student then discarded the

note without presenting it severing any notice to the parents. In this case, the School distract is

negligent in being sure the note got home. For example, in the case of MASTRANGELO v. WEST

SIDE UNION HIGH SCHOOL DIST. OF MERCED COUNTY, there was a student by the name

of Elge Mastrangelo. In his chemistry class, they were performing a gunpowder experiment.

During the experiment they mistook potassium chlorate for potassium nitrate. Both of these

ingredients were kept in similar packaging and were in front of the bench where the students

were performing the experiment. Due to the mix up the ingredients exploded and blow off his

left hand and injured his left eye. It also almost destroyed his right eye and injured his right hand.

Similar to Ray’s Case Elge was not supervised properly and it could have been prevented if they

had given proper instructions and information.

Another case showing negligence that resulted in injury is STATION v. TRAVELERS

INSURANCE COMPANY. In this Case, a student named Geraldine Stations had received severe
PORTFOLIO 3 3

burns to her right hand, sides and thighs. The student received these injuries due to a faulty

burner that came from either their science teacher, Roosevelt L. Wilson or the schools supplies.

The Burner was already well known to frequently go out and malfunction, but it was used

anyway. As the judges approached the table the lighter had gone out. In order to reignite the

burner, Geraldine’s partner and another student decided to relight it. They attempted to mimic the

relighted as their teacher had however, the alcohol jug exploded and its contents burned

Geraldine who was nearby. The Science teacher Roosevelt L. Wilson was not present when this

incident occurred. He had only come to help the girls set up the project and returned to his

classroom leaving the girls with the faulty equipment. In this case, despite the teacher and many

others knowing that particular burner constantly went out it was still left with the students

unsupervised. This lack of supervision lead to injury of the students as they attempted to fix the

burner.

Based on these cases we know similar situations have happened before. The supervision

of teachers and their going through with the assurance of safety is upmost. However, despite

everything we cannot always control what happens when students do not follow directions. We

will now look over cases similar to Ray’s that show that the school was not at fault.

On January 22, 1975 an incident occurred that prompted a case by the named of

CONNET v. FREMON CITY. SCH. DIST. In this case there were 4 total students in the class who

were being supervised by Mr.Blankenship according to the report. At the time of the incident the

teacher and three of the students were in a adjoining lab where they were cleaning up. Connet

was working with geo-blocks when he decided to join another student, Degner, at their table

where they were working with an alcohol burner to test the boiling point of certain substances.

Connet then wanted to see if the boiling points changed if they added alcohol to the vials. Degner
PORTFOLIO 3 4

denied this notion and asked him not to. However, Connet took it upon himself to do it anyway

despite being asked not to and not acquiring permission from the teacher to do this. When he

tried to add Alcohol to it, a fire erupted and the alcohol store exploded. This caused the student to

be engulfed in flames. The Teacher, Mr. Blankenship ran to the room after the explosion and put

the fire on the boy out with a blanket. In this case the Student, Connet decided to interact with an

experiment that was not his own and did actions not outlined in the original experiment. Connet

was only to work with Geoblocks and did not ask permission to use the Alcohol.

The Last case is GLASER GLASER v. EMPORIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. On the

morning of December 22, 1993, a student named Glaser had arrived at school in the hour

between 7:30AM and 7:45AM. The School day had not yet started and for reasons unlisted the

student was being chased by another fellow student. During the chase Glase ran into a public

street where he was git by an automobile adjacent to the school. In this case, School had not yet

started. The Incident had also occurred off school grounds in a public street, It is also worth

noting that the student had always walked to school and we can infer he had know street and

road safety as he got to school that way every day.

In conclusion I believe the middle school Ray Knight had gotten suspended from is guilty

of negligence. Despite the school being required by the school district to send multiple forms of

confirmation to the parents about the suspension they chose to send a note home with the

student. Similar to the two starting cases, Mastangelo v. west side union sch. Dist. and Station v.

Travelers insurance company. The students were left alone in potentially dangerous situations

without anyone to supervise them. All three incidents ended in injury to the student that could

have been prevented had only proper procedure been followed.


PORTFOLIO 3 5

References

FindLaw's Supreme Court of California case and opinions. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-supreme-court/1779651.html.

FindLaw's Supreme Court of Kansas case and opinions. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ks-supreme-court/1364854.html.

Louisiana, C. of A. of. (1974, February 11).STATION v. TRAVELERS INSU: 292 So.2d 289

(1974): so2d2891512. Retrieved from

https://www.leagle.com/decision/1974581292so2d2891512.

ROSE, J. (1978, July 11). Browse cases. Retrieved from https://casetext.com/case/connett-v-

fremont-cty-sch-dist-etc.

Potrebbero piacerti anche