Unit III: Liability and Safety Guest Presenter: Dr. Bill Camp

Dealing with Teacher-Specific School Law and Teacher Liability Unit III: Lesson 1 Things you need to know but may have been afraid to ask…

Performance Objective On a unit examination, demonstrate an understanding of teacher liability aspects of school law of particular concern to career and technical educators, with 70% accuracy.

Enabling Objectives Discuss liability. Explain tort law. Explain intentional interference. Explain the elements of negligence. Explain defenses for negligence. Interpret sample Virginia tort cases.

Why is This Important? Liability is a constant worry for all teachers. Particularly for Career and Technical Education teachers. Lawsuits in education are more common than ever. Like the lottery, odds are low but risks are huge.

Background Fundamental functions of primitive society was: Preserve peace Protect one individual’s safety from threat or injury by another Protect one individual’s property from threat by another.

Background Fundamental functions of modern society: Ensure peace Protect safety Protect property Protect reputation Provide education Protect freedom

Liability Modern law provides certain rights to each individual. “If by speech, act, or other conduct, a person fails to respect these rights, thereby damaging another, a tort has been committed, and the offending party may be held liable.” Liability is one person’s responsibility to compensate another for injury or loss resulting from or associated with actions or inactions resulting in a tort.

Tort French: “torquere,” meaning twisted, or wrong. Any of a wide range of civil wrongs, independent of contract, for which courts will assess monetary damages to an injured party.

Commission of a Tort Each person is responsible for his or her actions or inactions, as they affect others A tort (a civil wrong) may result from: Action (commission) Physical Speech Other conduct Inaction (omission)

A Tort is NOT: A criminal act, although a criminal act May produce injury, May lead to findings of liability, and May result in monetary redress, but Criminal justice is a separate process A breech of contract. A contract is an explicit agreement and failure to meet contractual agreements is a separate process.

Normal Responsibility Under British Common Law, the individual may not cause harm to another. (Harmful action prohibited) No general requirement exists to prevent harm. No “Good Samaritan” requirement. (Helpful action not normally required)

Special Responsibility Special relationships may exist between parties Parent/Guardian Occupation Authority Special relationships to create a requirement to prevent harm Employer Service provider Physician Police Teacher

In Loco Parentis Through society, parents entrust teachers with their children. During school functions, teacher stands “In the place of the parent.” Teacher has special authority. Make and enforce exceptional rules, as a parent would. Teacher has special responsibilities Prevent harm, as a parent would.

Types of Torts Intentional Interference Strict Liability Negligence

Intentional Interference Voluntary and intentional action Invades the interests of another In schools, intentional interference might stem from: Assault Battery False imprisonment

Assault Attempt to harm Appearance of attempt to harm Reasonable fear that harm is imminent Display of force Threat to harm No physical contact

Battery Physical contact occurs Assault may or may not precede battery Intentional contact Intention to cause harm Use of force

Teachers and Assault & Battery Reasonable punishment acceptable (Including corporal) Doctrine of “in loco parentis” gives great latitude. Physical contact must not cause long-term injury Threat must not produce reasonable fear for safety Malice/harm must not be intended Permanent injury must not result Never lose control, composure

False Imprisonment Illegally interfering with individual’s freedom: Movement Speech Religion School detention sounds like violation Doctrine of “in loco parentis” provides authority to place reasonable restrictions on freedom of student Reasonable detention is not a violation of this right

Strict Liability Hazard is present, such as: Field trip Laboratory School event Direct cause of injury cannot be determined Negligence was not to blame Somebody must pay Proximate entity best able to pay may be held liable Sometimes called “deep pocket” liability Very rare in education

Negligence The real problem in Career and Technical Education Unexpected and unintended (Not Intentional Interference) Fault can be placed (Strict Liability does not apply) Accident can be traced to someone’s error

Factors in Negligence Standard of Conduct Two Levels of Standards: Probability of injury balanced against expected benefit Perceived benefits of activity mediated by prudent care Prudent actions taken by responsible parties to prevent injury Two Levels of Standards: The Reasonable Person The Reasonably Prudent Teacher

The Reasonable Person Hypothetical person Community norm Person of average prudence Assuming the defendant as the basis: Physical attributes: size, strength, sight, heading, intelligence Special preparation Normal level of attention and perception

Reasonably Prudent Teacher Special preparation Licensed Educated Experienced Special Position Authority “in loco parentis” Special responsibility Look for hazards More careful in planning

Elements of Negligence Duty Standard of Care Proximate or Legal Cause Injury or Actual Loss

Duty Reasonable conduct to avoid causing injury to others through apparent risks Responsibility to protect others exists when it is reasonable to foresee hazard Duty increases as hazard increases Duty increases as level of responsibility increases Teacher in a hazardous setting has high level of duty

Standard of Care Every person is expected to exercise reasonable care As risk increases, standard of care increases As responsibility increases, standard of care increases Teacher in hazardous setting must exercise high standard of care Standard: Reasonable Prudent Teacher not Reasonable Person

Proximate or Legal Cause Connection between action or omission and the injury Duty to protect is present Reasonable person would foresee risk Reasonably Prudent Teacher would act to prevent accident The negligence must actually lead to the accident

Injury or Actual Loss Injury or loss occurred Negligence was the proximate or legal cause Multiple parties may share liability for damages

Defenses for Negligence Defendant may contend either: Not negligent Intervening event Most common defenses: Contributory Negligence Comparative Negligence Assumption of Risk Immunity Other defenses: Act of God Last Clear Chance

Contributory Negligence Fault or breach of duty on part of injured party Student was negligent Student intentionally caused the injury Conduct was not what a “reasonable person” of plaintiff’s age, education, size, etc. would have done

Contributory Negligence Standard of Care lower for student Younger Less experienced Not specially trained Not in position of responsibility Courts have required that the child commit a “gross disregard of safety in the face of known, perceived, and understood dangers” for contributory negligence to apply.

Contributory Negligence Proximate cause of injury was student’s action Defendant not at fault Absolves defendant completely Plaintiff recovers nothing

Comparative Negligence Contributory negligence partial but not total Plaintiff shares PART of the blame with defendant Plaintiff recovers prorated share of damages

Assumption of Risk Plaintiff recognizes hazard and accepts responsibility Athletes generally assume risks of playing Spectators generally assume risks at events Effectiveness limited outside sports and special events

Immunity National, state, and local governments immune from liability School district may be immune from liability Individuals are not covered by this immunity It will do you no good as a teacher or school administrator

Act of God No person can be held liable for an “Act of God” Injury caused by storm, flood, tornado, lightning bolt Reasonable care must have been taken Move activity indoors when a storm is coming Cancel school when roads are too icy

Last Clear Chance Student: Failed to prevent own injury Could see imminent danger Could see how to avoid injury Was physically capable of escaping harm Had time to avoid harm Failed to prevent own injury May be considered as a form of Contributory Negligence or may be used to avoid liability altogether.

Review

Definitions Liability is: Tort is: Individual’s responsibility to compensate another person for injury or loss resulting from or associated with actions or inactions resulting in a tort. Tort is: A civil wrong, other than breach of contract, for which courts will assess monetary damages to an injured party. Not a criminal act

Responsibility Actions that produce harm are prohibited Normally no “Good Samaritan” requirement Special relationships mean special responsibilities: Parent/Guardian Service Provider Police Firefighter Employer Teacher

In Loco-Parentis Latin for “In the place of the parent” Teacher is accorded in loco parentis authority for minor students. Teacher accepts in loco parentis responsibilities for minor students

Types of Tort Intentional Interference Strict Liability Negligence Assault Battery False Imprisonment Strict Liability Negligence

Negligence Unexpected Unintentional Foreseeable Preventable Cause can be traced Proximate cause Duty to prevent Fails “Standard of Conduct” Actual loss of injury

Standard of Care Reasonable Person Reasonably Prudent Teacher

Defenses for Negligence Charge Contributory Negligence Comparative Negligence Assumption of Risk Immunity

Bottom Line This lesson may sound theoretical BUT Understanding teacher liability is critical.