Running head: TORT LIABILITY 1

Tort Liability

Angelique Cameron

College of Southern Nevada

TORT LIABILITY 2

Abstract

A student by the name of Ray Knight was shot accidentally during his suspension from school.

This event occurred at a friend’s house. The case is an investigation into whether or not the

school is liable for what happened to the student. In this scenario, the school district policies

require that the parents be notified by phone and by mail, but the school did not follow this

policy. During the inquiry of this case the Tort law as pertaining to education will be discussed.

A brief explanation of the due process afforded to United States citizens will also be included.
TORT LIABILITY 3

Tort Liability

There have been more than a few cases where a student was suspended, and even though

the school sent home notification, the parents were unaware of the suspension. Some of the

events that took place during the suspensions have been disturbing, and others were mind-

boggling. The questions that come to mind when a student becomes injured during a suspension

are many, and the courts have had their hands full with those cases. Ray Knight was a student

who was suspended for three days, and the only notification that was sent home was a single

note. The student threw the note away, and during his time away from school, he was shot. The

following cases will briefly discuss the Tort laws in regards to education.

A tort is a civil wrong, a violation of duty that causes harm. Tort law provides individuals

with a way to sue for compensation for harm someone has caused someone else (Underwood &

Webb, 2006). There are several elements to the negligence factor under the tort laws, and some

of those elements are; duty to hire and retain qualified and competent staff, duty to adequately

supervise students, duty to provide adequate and appropriate instruction, duty to provide a safe

environment, duty to provide safe transportation, and duty subsequent to injury (Underwood &

Webb, 2006). Another factor is breach of duty, and in this case the injured individual must show

that the duty was breached. A third factor would be causation. For causation to be an issue the

plaintiff must show that the teacher’s negligence was the cause of the injury (Underwood &

Webb, 2006).

Additionally the way some cases are handled, is through a due process. Due process is a

an entitlement given to United States citizens under the Fourteenth Amendment to the

U.S.Constitution (Underwood & Webb, 2006). If the property interest of the student is at stake

than the courts will investigate whether or not due process was applied. This law ensures that the
TORT LIABILITY 4

student is given oral or written notice of the charges, an explanation of the evidence, and an

opportunity to present their side of the story (Underwood & Webb, 2006).

Professional malpractice is an additional element under the tort laws. Historically, most

educational liability cases have involved student injuries (Underwood & Webb, 2006). In one

lawsuit involving a suicide of a student, the counselors were found at fault. In Eisel v. Board Of

Education 324 Md. 376 (1991), the counselors were notified of the suicidal statements made

directly to them and to some of the other students. When the student denied the

statements, the counselors did not pursue any other action. The courts ruled that the counselors

had sufficient information to enable them to possibly change the outcome to the tragedy.
TORT LIABILITY 5

References

Carr v. School Bd. Of Pasco County 921 So.2d 825 (2006)

Collette v. Tolleson Unified School District , 203 Ariz. 359 ( 2002 )

Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975)

Sanford v. Stiles, 456 F.3d 298, 306 (3d Cir. 2006)

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. D. (2006). School law for teachers: Concepts and applications.

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.

Eisel v. Board Of Education 324 Md. 376 (1991)