Portfolio Assignment 1

Portfolio Assignment #3

Portfolio Assignment #3

Jodie Robinson
 Portfolio Assignment

Tort and Liability

Tort, which is defined as a violation of duty that causes harm, is something that all schools

must deal with and handle appropriately. In this scenario, tort and liability are the things that the

school and court must look at when making the deciding factor. Ray Knight was a student who

was suspended for three days and the school failed to follow its proper suspension protocol in

calling and sending a written notice to the parents. During his first day of suspension that his

parents didnt know about, Ray was accidentally shot while at a friends house. Because of the

schools negligence, Rays parents want to pursue liability charges against the school.

In order for Ray Knight and his parents to be able to sue the school district, they must be

able to prove that the school did not follow the proper procedures required for students who are

being suspended and because the school did not abide by these rules, it led to Ray being injured.

In the case Brahactek v. Millard a School District, a family sued the school district with a

wrongful death action when their son died from injuries obtained in his physical education class.

The student was struck with a golf club swung by a fellow student causing him to go into a coma

for two days after which he passed away (Cehdclass, 1985). The parents of the child were able to

win their case because they were able to prove that the school was negligent in following the

policies of keeping the students far apart from each other when swinging their golf clubs. When

it comes to Ray Knights case, his school was negligent in following their suspension procedures

and because of this his parents would be able to win their case.

Another example that the Knight family could look to as a guide in school negligence is the

case Ferraro v. Board of Education. In this case a student with behavioral problems attacked and

injured another student under the care of a substitute teacher (CECP, 1992). The students family

was able to win their case because the school did not inform the substitute teacher of the childs
 Portfolio Assignment

behavioral problems which led to the student being attacked. The school was negligent in

preparing the substitute teacher in an issue they knew was occurring and this resulted in student

injury. The Knight family can use cases like this as a guideline towards proving their sons

school was negligent in its procedures.

Even though the Knight family has a good chance in proving negligence, the school can

also win this case by proving they werent liable for the student at the time of the shooting. In the

case Brown v. Tesack, a student was injured when he took a can of duplicating fluid from a

school dumpster and later lit it on fire and was burned (UTSA, 1990). The school was able to

win this case by proving that they were not liable for the child when he took the fluid off school

property and later ignited it. The school properly disposed of the fluid and they were not held

responsible for it afterwards. In the Knight familys case, the school could win by proving that

they were not responsible for what happened to Ray once he left school property.

Another example the school could use as an example against the Knight family is the case

Hutchison v. Toews. In this case a student was injured after stealing chemicals from a chemistry

classroom and later taking them home and making a pipe cannon which exploded (UTSA, 1990).

The school was found not liable because the student stole the chemicals without the teachers

knowledge and took them off campus where he later ignited them. By proving that they were not

liable for the students actions off campus, these schools were able to win their cases which can

also be done in the Knight case.

Overall, when a student is injured on or off campus, finding who is at fault can be a

difficult process. When schools dont follow their proper procedures, injury can often be the

ending result. Because of this, I believe the Knight family has the upper hand in winning this

case. Their sons school did not follow its proper protocol when a child is suspended and because
 Portfolio Assignment

of this, their son ended up injured. If the family had been properly informed of their sons

suspension, he would have not been able to go to a friends house where his injury took place.
 Portfolio Assignment

References

CECP (1992). What are Tort Laws. Retrieved from http:

cecp.air.org/interact/authoronline/february99/4.htm

Cehdclass (2003). Written Supervision Standard not followed in Golf Mishap. Retrieved from

http: cehdclass.gmu.edu/jkozlows/brahatck.htm

UTSA (1990). Cases, Torts. Retrieved from http:

http://faculty.coehd.utsa.edu/dthompson/Chapter_11_Cases.html