Chapter Six: School Personnel and School District Liability

OVERVIEW:
This chapter discusses how school personnel and school districts can be held responsible for actions or
inactions that occur to their students.
I.
The School as a Safe Place
a. Schools are expected to protect children from harm and when they fail to do so they can
be held liable.
b. Educators have 3 legal duties established by the courts in place of parents (in loco
parentis)
i. To instruct
ii. To supervise
iii. To provide safety of students
c. There is no liability when unavoidable injury occurs.
II.
Liability of School Personnel
a. Intentional torts
i. Require proof of intent
ii. Examples: assault, battery, libel, slander, defamation, false arrest, malicious
prosecution, and invasion of privacy
b. Unintentional tort
i. Requires no proof of intent
ii. Charges can occur if deemed school personnel acted inappropriately or failed to
act appropriately
iii. 4 elements must be present to establish negligence, and unintentional tort
1. Standard of Care- the teacher or principal owned a legal duty to protect
the student by conforming to certain standards
2. Breach of Duty
3. Proximity or legal cause- the student must be able to demonstrate that a
causal relationship existed between the breach of duty and the actual
injury sustained by the student
4. Injury
c. Vicarious Liability
i. School districts can be held responsible because of the actions of their
employees
d. Foreseeability
i. The ability of the teacher or administrator to predict that an activity may cause
harm to a student.
1. School personnel are expected to foresee many problems that occur
2. Ignoring a potential problem still makes you liable if a student is injured.
e. Attractive nuisance
i. Dangerous condition that has special attraction to a less mature child who does
not appreciate the harm it could cause.
ii. If the owner of the attractive nuisance knows it is a potential problem and fails
to do anything to eliminate the risk they can be held liable.
f. Busing
i. School leaders and parents must ensure to the greatest extent possible that
students at bus stops on school sponsored transportation are protected from
harm.

III.

IV.
V.

VI.
VII.

ii. School board is responsible for the students from when the bus picks the student
up to the time the student reaches the school door.
Defamation
a. Defamation occurs when false statements are made about another person.
i. Teachers and administrators can both be held liable for defamation.
ii. School personnel can be held liable for statements against their colleagues or
students if they demonstrate malice or intent to harm.
b. 2 Types of Defamation
i. Libel- written defamation
ii. Slander- oral defamation
c. Defenses against defamation
i. Privilege- teachers given benefit of the doubt by courts because of qualified
privilege
ii. Good Faith- similar to privilege, as long as teachers act without intent to harm
iii. Truth
iv. Mental Distress
v. False Imprisonment
vi. Trespassing on Personal Property
Proper Instruction and Student Safety- teachers are liable for safety and have the
responsibility of following all safety precautions.
Duties of Supervision
a. Adequate supervision in one situation may be totally inadequate in another situation.
b. Courts consider several factors in determining liability in supervision cases
i. Nature of activity involved
ii. Age
iii. Number of students involved in an activity
iv. Quality of supervision
c. If administrators are aware students are on campus, before or after the school day, they
can be held liable for injury and are responsible for supervision.
Liability Involving Civil Rights Statutes
Educational Malpractice

LANDMARK CASES:
Hosemann v Oakland Unified School District: This case, along with Doe v Taylor, dealt with making
the school environment safe and conducive for students. This represented the first time a court
interpreted a state constitutional amendment that grants students and staff an inalienable right to
attend campuses that are safe, secure, and crime free.
Doe v Taylor: This case, along with Hosemann v Oakland Unified School District, dealt with making
the school environment safe and conducive for students. This case involved sexual abuse of a female
student where the principal was held liable.
Wood v Strickland: This court case ruled that school board members can be held liable for damages
under Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 when they violate the constitutional rights of
students.
Carey v Piphus: This case is significant because it clarified the conditions under which recovery of
damages can be rewarded. School officials violated the students Fourteenth Amendment rights
because they were given a lengthy suspension without a due process.

Francis v School Board of Palm Beach County: This case dealt with school transportation. The
Florida Supreme Court ruled the school boards duty of care to students extends from when a bus picks
up the student at the bus stop to when they reach the school door.
Gordon v Oak Park School District No. 97: The Illinois Appellate Courts ruled that a teacher was
allowed to yell at a student. The teacher would not be held liable when they verbally chastise a
student.
Celestine v Lafayette Parish School Board: This case involved a teacher embarrassing a student by
making them write an inappropriate word they used in class on the board 1,000 times. The teacher was
dismissed in this case.
New Jersey v T.L.O.: The court ruled that the parent does not always have to be notified during a
period of detainment of a student. The court said they need to allow schools leeway to provide a safe
school environment. In this particular case a student was accused of bringing a gun to school for
which no gun was ever found. The student claimed she asked for police and school officials to call her
mother and they did not comply.
Norman v Ogallala Public School District: The Supreme Court of Nebraska ruled on this case. In this
case, a student was injured while completing a project while operating a welding torch. The court
ruled that the district did not adequately protect the student by not complying with safety regulations.
Titus v Lindberg: This case involved on-campus, before school supervision. The court ruled that the
school is responsible for supervising students who arrive early for school, regardless of how early, if
you are aware of their presence. The courts have not set a time frame on when supervision must occur.
Peter W. v San Francisco Unified School District: This case dealt with educational malpractice. This
case involved a student who was unable to read above the 5th grade level at the time of high school
graduation. His family sued the school district for essentially providing a bad education. The courts
could not establish standards of care for classroom instruction and therefore the schools won the
decision.
Hoffman v Board of Education: This case dealt with educational malpractice. A student who was
misplaced into a program for the mentally retarded for eleven years claimed he had diminished
intellectual ability because of the misplacement. Eventually, the courts ruled in favor of the school
board because they couldnt determine that they breeched their duty.

APPLICATION FOR ADMINISTRATORS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS:

Teachers, administrators and school districts all can be held liable for actions or inactions that result in
students being injured. Courts have been realistic by not holding these parties responsible for
unavoidable injury, but in many other cases they have been held liable. Most schools and teachers
recognize the liability associated with intentional torts (ex. Assault) but fail to recognize that
unintentional torts can leave them liable as well. Unintentional torts can arise when school personnel
fail to act appropriately. For example, ignoring a dangerous situation, like shattered glass, could put
school personnel liable if a student is injured. There seems to be no room for a teacher or
administrator to ever expect someone else to take care of a problem. Another major issue school
personnel need to be aware of is defamation, or making false statements about another person. If
school personnel make false statements about another colleague or a student, with intent to harm and
malice they can be held liable. Finally, administrators and school districts must be aware that the court
has never specified a time that supervision of students on campus begins and ends. Therefore, schools

must have a plan in place for supervision even outside of the time their staff is contracted to begin and
end their day.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS:

Respondeat Superior: the master is responsible only for authorized acts of its servants or agents.
Vicarious Liability: the board rather than the principal is held liable for the tortious acts of its
teachers, even though the board is not at fault.
Nuisance: any dangerous or hazardous condition that limits free use of property by the user.
Invitee: one who is present on the premises by invitation of the owner.
Licensee: a person who has the privilege to enter school property.
Trespass: enters school property without permission.
Defamation: occurs when false statements are made about another person.
Slander: oral defamation.
Standard of Care: The teacher or principal owned a legal duty to protect the student by conforming to
certain standards.
Breach of Duty: The teacher or principal owed a legal duty to protect the student by conforming to
certain standards and failed to do so.
Proximity or Legal Cause: The student must be able to demonstrate that a causal relationship existed
between the breach of duty and the actual injury sustained by the student.
Injury: The student must prove actual injury based on a breach of duty by the teacher or principal.
Contributory Negligence: the most common defense employed in charges of negligence. Failure of
an injured plaintiff to act prudently, considered to be a contributory factor in the injury suffered, and
sometimes reducing the amount recovered from the defendant
Precedent: an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in
subsequent similar circumstances.
Sovereign Immunity: The King can do no wrong The state or federal government is protected from
suit and cant be held liable for injuries that resulted in the proper execution of government functions.
Governmental Functions: Doctrine extended to school districts because they are involved in state
action and are agents of the state.
Proprietary: These activities are normally those in which admission fees are charged.
Ministerial: Governmental acts are those required by state mandates or local school board policy and
ones for which school personnel do not exercise choice.
Statute of Limitations: a statute prescribing a period of limitation for the bringing of certain kinds of
legal action.