Palmer v. Merluzzi Argued October 18, 1988. Decided February 17, 1989. By Laura Watson

Who is who? Daniel K. Palmer- Plaintiff - High School Senior Peter L. Merluzzi- Defendant -Superintendent of Schools for the district.

Background On September 28, 1986, in Hunterdon Central High School in New Jersey, Dan Palmer a senior and 3 other students were drinking beer and smoking marijuana in the school’s radio station. Dan Palmer was a senior, a starting wide receiver for the football team and also enrolled in a class called “Careers in Broadcasting”. A day after the incident, during a meeting with the football coach and school disciplinarian, Dan admitted to the violations. On September 30, 1986, Dr. Grimm (the school disciplinarian) sent a letter to the Palmer notifying them of a 10 day suspension. *This included both curricular and extracurricular activities. *The notification did not include any other penalties.

The decision was not concluded in the meeting. Background Approximately, on October 3, 1986 Dr.Grimm, Merluzzi and other administrators met in order to discuss whether an additional penalty was required due to the offense. The decision was not concluded in the meeting. Merluzzi contacted two local drug and alcohol rehabilitation centers for their opinion on the situation. Merluzzi was told sixty days was a reasonable period of time to deal with the issue. On October 13, Merluzzi recommended to the board that Palmer and the other students receive a sixty day extracurricular suspension. During the meeting Dan’s father was given 30 minutes to discuss with the board how the extra suspension would affect Dan’s scholarship potential. After the meeting, Merluzzi issued Dan with the sixty day extracurricular suspension.

Afterwards… After the meeting, the Palmers decided to take Merluzzi and the Board of Education to court. They sought to: 1.) Eliminate the ten and sixty day school suspension 2.) Reinstate Palmer 3.) Remove this from his records The Palmers also claimed that Dan’s right to due process and his 14th amendment to equal protection were both violated. Main Issues -Whether due process was required -Extension of due process due this case The decision was done in the United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit. -Extracurricular activities is not a fundamental right.

Outcome Not Guilty. The court decided that Palmer received the aqueduct level of due process due to the incident Due process was during the informal conference with the coach, disciplinarian and student. The student handbook contains policies on drugs and alcohol. The handbook states an automatic 10 day suspension is necessary. The interscholastic athletic program policy states that no student may participate who does not show good citizenship and responsibility.

Implications Students can get suspended (no matter who they or the effect) because it is a policy. Suspension includes all extracurricular and curricular activities, no matter what.

Applications Due process and fairness applies to all students. Extracurricular activities and athletic commitment should not have any impact on the decision. Judging the behavior of all students must be equal.

Who was Dan Palmer? A.) High school senior, football player and part of the radio station. B.) Teacher C.) Student D.) Principal

Where did this case take place? A.) New York B.) Florida C.) New Jersey D.) California

Why did the Palmers go to court? A.) Dan’s 14th amendment rights were violated B.) Dan got into a fight at school C.) Dan dropped out of school D.) None of the above

Did Dan admit to the violations? A.) Yes B.) No

What was the outcome? A.) Not Guilty B.) Guilty C.) Mixed D.) No Decision

References FindACase| Palmer v. Merluzzi. (n.d.). FindACase™. Retrieved April 16, 2012, from http://pa.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19890217_0041199.C03.htm/qx PALMER BY PALMER v. MERLUZZI - Argued October 18, 1988.. (n.d.). Leagle Home. Retrieved April 16, 2012, from http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?page=7&xmldoc=1989958868F2d90_1945.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006&SizeDisp=7