Running head: Artifact #3 Tort and Liability 1

Artifact #3

Tort and Liability

Wyatt A. Reid

College of Southern Nevada

Artifact #3 Tort and Liability 2

Ray Knight was suspended for three days because of repeated absences. The school sent

home a note with Ray who proceeded to throw it in the trash. The school policy was that the

school notify the parents through the telephone and a written message through the mail. The next

day Ray went to a friend’s house and was accidently shot. The question at hand is whether the

parents have defensible grounds to pursue liability charges against the school officials or not.

The first side that I will examine is the side of the school and its officials. The first case

that to support the defense of the school is Man v. Palmerton Area School District (2017). This

case is about a football player in high school who received brain trauma in a practice. The player

got hit and jarred and may have been showing signs of a concussion. The coach sent the player

back into practice where he sustained a severe brain injury. The plaintiff argues that the coach

should have followed protocol and not let him continue practicing. The coach and the school one

there was not enough evidence supporting the fact that the coach knowingly put the player in

more risk of injury. Based on this case Ray Knight and his family do not have a good case,

because like the football player, Ray Knight was not knowingly put under any extra danger at

hands of the school. It was his friend and himself that put him in danger and subsequently shot.

The second case that defends the school is Mohamed v. Irving Independent School

District (2017). This case is about a boy who brings a homemade electronic device to school that

could be mistaken for a bomb. The device was confiscated from the student and the school began

to question the student. The law suit is in part about the schools failure to do everything required

by their own rules in this situation. The court ruled that because there was an inherent danger to

the rest of the school that it was permissible that at this time they did not follow protocol exactly.

This is a good defense for the school. Similarly Ray Knight’s school did not follow procedure.
Artifact #3 Tort and Liability 3

The first case that would give the Knight’s a reason to pursue liability charges is Rogers

v. Christina School District (2013). This case is about a student who had made known to a

counselor that she had suicidal feelings. The councilor met with him for four hours and decided

that he was not a risk to himself at this point. The student went home and hung himself. The

parents filed suit saying that the school was negligent. The councilor, under regulations, should

have notified the parents that their son had expressed these feelings, but she did not. The decision

of the court was that because the counselor did not follow regulations she was negligent. The

school of Ray Knight did not follow regulations and therefore his family has grounds to pursue

liability charges based on negligence of the administration not properly notifying his parents of

the suspension.

Jerkins Jerkins v. Board of Education of Pleasantville Public Schools and Rosemay

Clarke, Defendants-Appellants is the second case to show that Ray Knight and his family should

pursue liability charges. In this case a boy who is at school before the class day starts get hit by a

car. The school is found liable for his injury even though they were not officially started, because

they should have assumed supervision. Likewise Ray Knight was not at school, but the school

should have been watching him. He was suspended, but the parents had no knowledge of that,

therefore the school should have been supervising him.

In conclusion I believe that Ray Knight’s family has a good reason to pursue liability

charges against the school. Based on the case Rogers v. Christina School District (2013) where

the school clearly violated its policy to inform the parents properly. The case of Ray’s

suspension and injury are very similar to this case and for that reason the school is liable for the

injuries caused to Ray Knight.

Artifact #3 Tort and Liability 4

References

JERKINS JERKINS v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF PLEASANTVILLE PUBLIC

SCHOOLS AND ROSEMARY CLARKE, DEFENDANTS- APPELLANTS. June 14,

2017. Retrieved September 23, 2017. http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nj-supreme-

court/1491353.html

MANN v. PALMERTON AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, No. 16-2821 (2017). Retrieved

September 23, 2017. https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20170921101

MOHAMED v. IRVING INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-

2283-L (2017). Retrieved September 23, 2017.

https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20170519e25

ROGERS v. CHRISTINA SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 45, 2012. Retrieved September 23, 2017.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/de-supreme-court/1639232.html