PORTFOLIO 3: TORT AND LIABILTY 1 of 5

Portfolio 3: Tort and Liability

EDU 210 Nevada School Law

Arian M. Mestas
PORTFOLIO 3: TORT AND LIABILTY 2 of 5

A middle school student, Ray Knight, had unexcused absences and was therefore

suspended from school for three days. The school failed to follow through with school district

procedure to notify his parents by telephone and also a written notice by mail. The school did

give Ray Knight a notice to give to his parents but he threw it away. With his parents unaware

of his suspension, Ray Knight went to visit a friend on his first day of suspension where he was

shot by accident. This case is to determine if his parents have proper grounds to hold the school

liable for his injury.

In the case of Jerkins Jerkins v. Board of Education of Pleasantville Public Schools

(2007), one can argue that the school can in fact be held liable. In this case, Joseph Jerkins was in

third grade when he got hit by a car as he was walking home and became paralyzed. That day

was an early-dismissal day and neither his father or older brother were aware so he was walking

home alone. The court decided that the school would be held liable because the school has a duty

of reasonable care and safety of the students. The school breached that duty when they allowed

him to walk home alone without a parent or older sibling and it is foreseeable that a child of such

young age could get injured walking home alone. Although Ray Knights was not on school

grounds, there are some cases where the schools can still be held liable or partially liable like in

this case. Since the school didn’t follow procedure they should be held partially liable in the case

of Ray Knight.

To hold the school liable for Ray Knight’s Injury, we will also rely on the case Mitchell

v. Cedar Rapids Community School District (2013). This is a case where the negligence of a
PORTFOLIO 3: TORT AND LIABILTY 3 of 5

school led to a child getting sexually assaulted. A special education student, D.E., who was in

the ninth grade left school before dismissal with a friend and was raped by another special

education student from the same school. The school was found negligent for breaching their duty

of reasonable care and didn’t act reasonably when they found out she was not in her last class of

the day. Just as the school didn’t act reasonably in this case, Ray Knight’s school didn't either.

There was a policy that should have been followed and they failed to do so, which lead to him

being injured.

In the case of Carrier v. Lake Pend Oreille School District (2006), it can be argued that

Ray Knights’ parents have grounds to hold the school liable for his injury. In this case, a student

committed suicide his senior year of high school. When the student was in ninth grade he had

written an essay in his English class talking about how he had thought about killing himself

before, but that he no longer felt that way and was enjoying life. His parents filed a suit against

the school because they didn’t inform them of their son’s suicidal tendencies. The school was not

found liable because the essay was written in past tense and indicated that he was happy at that

point in time, meaning that by definition, there was no suicidal tendency. There was no way that

they could foresee that he would later commit suicide. This is also the case for Ray Knight’s

situation. The school could not have foreseen that he would be accidentally shot.

When relying on the case Glaser Glaser v. Emporia Unified School District (2001), the

school should not be held liable for Knight’s injury. In this case, a seventh grader was being

chased by another student and he ran into a public street that was not on school grounds and got

hit by a car. Since he was not on school property, the school was not held liable for his injuries.

Since Ray Knight was not on school property then his school should not be held liable either.
PORTFOLIO 3: TORT AND LIABILTY 4 of 5

The court cases Jerkins Jerkins v. Board of Education of Pleasantville Public

Schools(2007) and Mitchell v. Cedar Rapids Community School District (2013) hold more

validity in this case, and so I decide that the school district be held partially liable for his injury.

Although he was not on school grounds there was a policy that should have been followed. By

the school failing to follow the proper procedure in notifying his parents of his suspension, lead

to him being accidentally shot.

PORTFOLIO 3: TORT AND LIABILTY 5 of 5

Resources

FindLaw's Supreme Court of Idaho case and opinions. (n.d.). Retrieved March 13, 2017, from

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/id-supreme-court/1417046.html

FindLaw's Supreme Court of Iowa case and opinions. (n.d.). Retrieved March 13, 2017, from

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ia-supreme-court/1635949.html

FindLaw's Supreme Court of Kansas case and opinions. (n.d.). Retrieved March 13, 2017, from

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

FindLaw's Supreme Court of New Jersey case and opinions. (n.d.). Retrieved March 13, 2017,

from http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nj-supreme-court/1491353.html