Tort and Liability 1

Edu 210 - Artifact #3

Tort and Liability

Gemma Crowell

College of Southern Nevada

March 12, 2016

Tort and Liability 2

Ray Knight was a student of Bright Futures Middle School when he was suspended for

three days for his many unexcused absences. His school gave him a notice of suspension to give

to his parents. Ray was scared his parents will get mad at him that he threw the note away, so his

parents never got to see it. On the first day of his suspension, Ray decided to pass the time at his

friend's house. While he was there, Ray was accidentally shot. Ray's parents claimed that they

have no knowledge of the suspension and sued the school for negligence and charges of liability.

The first case to be presented in favor of Ray Knight's parents to lawfully pursue charges

against the school officials will be King v. North East Security, and Metropolitan School District

of Washington Township (2003). In the case of King v. North East Security and Metropolitan

School District of Washington Township (2003), "Nicholas King was standing in the school

parking lot waiting for a ride home with another student, when a large crowd approached. After a

verbal exchange, the crowd increased and some began yelling and screaming. Ultimately a

student struck King, and then others joined in. Finally, someone yelled that the police were

coming and the crowd of students quickly dispersed. One eyewitness stated he was one of the

last students to leave and never saw the police. As a result of the beating, King suffered two

fractures to his jaw as well as several lacerations and bruises to his head and body" (FindLaw,

2016). In regard to the case of Ray Knight, King v. North East Security, and Metropolitan School

District of Washington Township (2003) serves to support the charges brought by his parents

because Ray was shot as a result of the school's negligence and are therefore liable for his death.

The second case to be presented proving that Ray Knight's parents have a lawful right to

pursue liability charges against the school officials will be Station v. Travelers Insurance

Company (1970). "A fellow student struck a match and an open container of alcohol ignited,

causing Station's daughter to sustain serious burns about her body. Station alleged that the
Tort and Liability 3

accident was caused solely by the negligence of the School Board in allowing students of such

young age to handle flammable material without proper instruction or supervision and permitting

the keeping of flammable material in glass containers" (Leagle, 2015). In regard to Ray Knight's

case, the case of Station v. Travelers Insurance Company (1970) serves to hold the school

officials liable for the failure properly inform the parents of Ray Knight's suspension. If the

parents were properly informed, Ray Knight would have been properly supervised and his death

could have been prevented as he would not have been at his friend's house if his parents were

properly informed of the note.

The first case in favor of the school to be presented is Glaser v. Emporia Unified School

District No. 253 (2001). "Todd Glaser, was a seventh-grader at Lowther Middle School in

Emporia, Kansas. When he was chased by another student, he ran off school grounds into a

public street. He was injured in a collision with a car driven by Patricia Gould-Lipson. Glaser

settled his claims against the driver, and the district court granted summary judgment in favor of

Emporia School District No. 253" (FindLaw, 2016). In regards to Ray Knight's case, the case of

Glaser v. Emporia Unified School District No. 253 (2001), serves to free the school officials

from negligence, because Ray was not on the school grounds when he was accidentally shot, and

therefore, the school was not responsible for the absence of supervision and was not liable.

The second case in favor of the school is Connett v. Fremont County School District

(1978). "John Connett obtained an alcohol can which had been left in a nearby sink by his

teacher, Mr. Blankenship and which the teacher had used before class to fill the burners that one

of his students needed for a chemistry project. After filling the alcohol burners, Mr. Blankenship

left the can in the sink about four feet from the experiment table. He testified that it must have
Tort and Liability 4

been his intention to again use the alcohol during the upcoming class period. Connett had not

asked for nor been given permission either to use the alcohol or to interfere with a classmate's

experiment. Even so, he poured the alcohol into one of the beakers of solution without mishap,

and then, as he was pouring the alcohol into the other, fire broke out and the vessel containing

the alcohol exploded. Upon hearing the explosion, Blankenship ran from the adjoining room into

the laboratory where he used a blanket to put out the fire which had engulfed the boy in flame"

(Leagle, 2015). In regards to the case of Ray Knight, the case of Connett v. Fremont County

School District (1978) serves to defend the school officials from Ray Knight's parents' accusation

of negligence and charges of liability, because the school could not have foreseen the events that

led to the shooting of Ray Knight, and that the school would not have been able to constantly

supervise him at all times.

My decision in this case of Ray Knight v. the school is in favor of the Ray Knight's

parents and that they have grounds for liability charges against the school officials. The two

cases King v. North East Security, and Metropolitan School District of Washington Township

(2003) and Station v. Travelers Insurance Company (1970) supported the case against the school

and holds them liable for failing to properly inform the parents that Ray Knight was about to be

suspended. A note was not sufficient in the case that it could have been misplaced or thrown

away as what had happened. If the parents had been properly informed, they could have

prevented Ray Knight from going out of the house on the first day of his suspension and his

presence at his friend's house could have been prevented and he would have not been a victim of

accidental shooting on that day.

Tort and Liability 5

References

Connett v. Fremont County School District (1978). (Leagle, 2015). Retrieved at

http://www.leagle.com/decision/19781678581P2d1097_11672/CONNETT%20v.%20FR

EMONT%20CTY.%20SCH.%20DIST.,%20ETC.

Glaser v. Emporia Unified School District No. 253 (2001). FindLaw (2016). Retrieved at

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

King v. North East Security, and Metropolitan School District of Washington Township (2003).

FindLaw (2016). Retrieved at http://caselaw.findlaw.com/in-supreme-court/1053248.html

Station v. Travelers Insurance Company (1970). (Leagle, 2015). Retrieved at

http://www.leagle.com/decision/1970846236So2d610_1672.xml/STATION%20v.%20T

RAVELERS%20INSURANCE%20COMPANY