The Benefits Of Tort Schools

T.L.O. case “...school officials do not have to meet the same standards as police officers when conducting searches” (New Jersey v. T.L.O.). The T.L.O. case was just one of the cases concerning schools and there were many others, including the Safford Unified School District v. Redding case. This case specifically concerned searching for drugs in schools. The Court ruled in this case, “...no indication of danger to the students from the power of the drugs or their quantity or any reason to suppose that Savana was carrying these pills in her underwear. Given these deficiencies, we conclude that the search was unreasonable. T.L.O. directed school officials to limit the intrusiveness of a search in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of the infraction” (Safford Unified School District v. Redding). Basically, if there is no disturbance in the school day, then there should be a search procedure with a warrant. However, if there is a disturbance in the school day, the school should not be required to get a search

“The supervision, or lack of supervision, of school children does not fall within the scope of care, custody, and control of real property that is stated in the Rule.”, 42 Pa. C.S. § 8542(b)(3). “Immunity will be denied a local agency such as a school district only when there is negligence, which makes government-owned property unsafe for the activities for which it is regularly used, for which it is intended to be used, or for which it may be reasonably foreseen to be used.”, Vann v. Board of Education, School District of Philadelphia, 76 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 604, 464 A.2d 684 (1983).

I’m reaching out to you as a concern parent in regards to incident that happen on 03/10/2017 Friday. My daughter Ahneya Barrett had an unfortunately altercation with another student and Mr. Alexander at Western Branch High school use unreasonable force with my daughter; moreover Mr. Alexander made the statement to my daughter, “That’s what you get” as she slid into the wall. I have related my concerns to Dr. Whitley and the administration staff; nevertheless can’t anyone address the issue about my

Section 9(2)(a) of the Civil Liability Act states that when deciding whether a reasonable person would have taken precautions against a risk of harm, the courts consider the probability of harm occurring if care was not taken. Secondly, s 9(2)(b) considers what the gravity/ seriousness of the risk was and whether the defendant should adopt special care if s/he knows that people with particular needs are exposed to the foreseeable risk. However, the teacher/ school authority is not required to protect the student against all risk and sometimes a reasonable response is to do

4. If school officials knew a violent act was threatened to occur or if there should have been a school official on duty where the students were and was not, the school could be held liable for the injury.

The reporter was contacted at 2:08pm at 09/01/2015 for additional information. The reporter said they were suspecting abuse, but didn’t specify. The reporter was asked was she suspecting molestation, and she replied that she didn’t want to say something that wasn’t true. The reporter never gave a clear answer to what she was alleging. The reporter said Jessica (teacher) has been very concerned about Harmony. Harmony transferred to Mooreville Elementary on 08/24/2015, and she has been arriving to school late (10:30am). It is unknown how many times the child has been tardy/late. The teacher (Jessica) spoke with Wendy about the victim being late for school, and she said “the child will be on time and they were in the process of moving”. The child has been coming to school not clean (not getting a bath), and Jessica felt as though something was not right. Also, last night (08/31/2015), the reporter said the child did not get a bath. The principal was very concerned about the child and would like for someone to come see about Harmony. The reporter contacted DHS and was told to contact the

The current law in place regarding teacher’s liability for personal injury is effective in placing responsibility on the state and away from the teacher. This is reflected through the Public Service and Other Legislation (Civil Liability) Amendment Bill 2013 (QLD) which amended the Public Service Act 2008 (QLD) as well as other legislation. The aim of the amendments is to provide ‘legislative immunity against civil liability.Liability will instead lie with the state.’ The Queensland government’s clear intention for this amendment was ‘not about reducing responsibility and accountability of public servants: it is about ensuring that we have a framework in place that supports our people when they do jobs we ask of them and do them in an appropriate standard.’ The government also proposed in the amendment that ‘the state has a right to recover contributions from employees who are subsequently found to have engaged in conduct other than in good faith and where it amounts to gross negligence.’Subsequently, while the Queensland government has allowed for such legislative framework, transfiguration of political climates may affect the status of this legislation.

In January 2015, her family contacted the school in an attempt to resolve the issue, but the school did not act in accordance with their anti-bullying policy nor take steps to effectively deal with the ongoing harassment Williams faced. She argued the school failed to acknowledge and manage the maltreatment of the plaintiff despite bullying being evident to several teachers and staff employed at Cardiff College. Williams is seeking $250,000 in damages for psychiatric expenses and psychological injury.

Tort reform refers to laws passed on a state-by-state basis that basically places limits or caps on the type or amount of damages that can be awarded in personal injury lawsuits. Personally, I definitely agree that tort reform should be passed into law for every state because sometimes the damages that are awarded in lawsuits are too excessive. Moreover, tort reform still allows for the plaintiff to recover damages just not at an excessive and unreasonable amount of damages.

Tort reform is very controversial issue. From the plaintiff’s perspective, tort reforms seems to take liability away from places such as insurance companies and hospitals which could at times leave the plaintiff without defense. From the defendant’s perspective, tort reform provides a defense from extremely large punitive damage awards. There seems to be no median between the two. Neither side will be satisfied. With the help of affiliations such as the American Tort Reform Association and Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse, many businesses and corporations are working to change the current tort system to stop these high cash awards.

A tort is wrongful interference against a person or property, other than breaches of contract, for which the courts can rectify through legal action. The reform effort is aimed at reducing the number of unnecessary lawsuits that burden the court system while still allowing injured parties compensation when they’ve been wronged. This latest effort at tort reform has given rise to the same spirited rhetoric that might be found in a courtroom.

There are many questions and arguments that remain about the standard of care within schools. Should the current standard of care in relation to schools be increased or remain the same or be substantially reduced? Does law of torts make a teacher’s job too difficult? Should schools always be held liable when a student is injured? ‘A tort is a “civil wrong” and for someone to commit a tort they have to interfere with another person’s rights, or fail in their legal obligations to that person, and this causes the person to suffer.’ (Drew Hopkins, 2008) An example case of civil wrong is State of Victoria v Bryar [1970] 44 ALJR 174.

The school staff has abused the children physically, sexually, emotionally, and psychologically. The students has

When it comes to schools the district does whatever it cam to keep the students safe. By setting rules the students are to follow. Rules such as, dress code, attendance, classroom procedures, and more. All indended for one reason and that is to protect the students.

From the amount of school shootings that have occurred in the past 5 years, as well as a plethora of unpublicized acts of intimidation, threat, and simple assault occurring in the classroom, it is reasonable to conclude that for many young children, school is not the safe haven that it was once believed to be. Instead, it is a place of constant fear, where the possibility of harm is an undeniable threat.