1. Negligence in Schools Overview
Liability
Duty of care
Negligence test
Supervision
Field trips
EDPS 595 – Leadership
Educational Policy Studies
da Costa

2. Liability Liability for accidents at school: When can you be sued?
First thing to know is that accidents that happen during school (typically) falls under “tort law” (civil – not criminal)
There are two branches of tort law:
Negligence
Intentional

3. Some definitions
Liability: the condition of having legal responsibility for a loss, penalty, or expense
Vicarious liability: the responsibility of one person for the acts of another
Foreseeability: the teacher’s ability to predict or anticipate that a certain activity may be harmful to students

4. Why is there a great deal of teacher liability?
Schools are prone to accidents and therefore litigation
Accidents can lead to allegations of teacher negligence
Courts in Canada and the U.S. have awarded large sums of money to students who were seriously and permanently injured at school
People are more litigious now than before and have a better understanding of their legal rights

5. Analysis of Negligence
Negligence cases involve a basic four-step analysis:
Duty of care
Standard of care
Breach of standard of care
Damages to the injured person that were caused by the breach of standard of care

6. What is expected of teachers?
Duty of care:
Automatic for teachers in charge of students
You are expected to ensure that students are safe from reasonably foreseeable risks
Standard of care:
This varies depending on the context and area of expertise
The “careful parent”

7. Case study #1: Sometimes an accident is just an accident…
Read case, then … After reading case, what characteristics stand out given the 4-step negligence test?

8. Sometimes an accident is just an accident…
The student "was neither a novice floor hockey player, nor did she or her classmates lack instruction on how the game was to be played". Further, the student incurred injuries at a time when floor hockey "was neither new nor unfamiliar" to her (p.17). In addition, unlike in Myers where a student was injured "when attempting to perform a difficult gymnastic maneuver, unsupervised by any teacher" the Court found that the teacher had properly been supervising the student and that there was no evidence that she was not provided with proper safety equipment. (Scott, 2011)

9. Why is this case important?
As a teacher, what is the “take-away” from this case?
EDPS 410 – Ethics & Law
Educational Policy Studies
Kanuka/da Costa

10. Case study #2
On October 26, 1982, Thomas, then age 16, broke his neck while making a tackle in a high school football game. Several games before this game, Thomas had been given the go-ahead to play football after recovering from an injury sustained to his finger in an earlier game. He was an exceptional athlete but, apparently, had a longer than usual neck. He and members of his family sued, amongst other, his three coaches and the Hamilton Board of Education, which ran the extra-curricular football program. All the necessary steps to secure medical attention were carried out after the accident. Written parental consent for participation to play football were obtained, in advance, as per the school district policy. (for full appealed case, see:
Do you think the trial judge ruled for the defendant or the plaintiff?
What is your legal argument?

11. Standard of Care, what’s expected?
Supreme Court of Canada has established 4 criteria for determining standard of care in a specific situation. At trial, the courts will consider:
Is the activity suitable to the age, mental and physical conditions of the students?
Have students been progressively taught to perform the activity properly?
Is the equipment adequate and suitably arranged?
Is the activity being supervised properly

12. Testing negligence in the courts
the omission to do something that a reasonable person would do, or
the doing of something which a reasonable person would not do.
Before the fact:
Is there a duty of care owed to the student?
Is there a foreseeable risk of harm in the situation?
What is the standard of care (degree of care) that must be met?
What must the teacher do to meet this standard?
After the fact:
Was loss or injury sustained by a student (physical or emotional)?
Was loss or injury caused by failure to meet the standard of care?
Was the type of loss or injury foreseeable in the circumstances?
Was the injured student (or any other person) partly responsible?

13. Negligence in Outside of Classrooms
Teachers are rarely sued for actions in their classrooms. But what about field trips? Hallways? Playgrounds?

14. Unexpected Activities
What do you think about these circumstances: What if there is a snow storm? Early release days? When a child expresses doubt about going home for lunch?

15. A case to think about … Travis Murao case
Snowboarding accident, January 2000 at Blackcomb Ski Resort
Student left parapalegic

16. Travis Murao – snowboarding accident
Murao, now a quadriplegic, had sued his teachers, his school district and the Blackcomb Mountain ski resort for injuries he suffered on a snowboard jump during a high-school outing in January Murao was 17 and a novice snowboarder when he attempted the 4.5-metre jump that his teachers had approved. Instead of clearing it, he fell awkwardly on his head, broke his neck and severely damaged his spinal cord -- leaving him confined to a wheelchair for life. Murano’s lawyer, Joe Murphy, argued the teachers were negligent for failing to warn their students that Terrain Park could be dangerous. "There were special dangers for kids who were inexperienced snowboarders," said Murphy. "But Travis, as a 17-year-old, didn't understand how dangerous it was. The teacher in charge did, but did nothing in warning Travis." "The kids were allowed to do everything and anything, as long as they stayed in bounds and stayed with their friends," said Murphy. "And Travis, at the time of the accident, was following one of his friends over a large jump. "He thought he could do the jump, but couldn't. At the last moment, when he realized he was over his head, he tried to slow down or stop. But it was too late." The school district's lawyer, Carla Forth, said she felt Blackcomb was chiefly responsible.

17. In closing…
The standard expected is not that of “perfect parent,” but of “careful parent”