Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Baynard v. Malone
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided October 19, 2001No. 00-2340, 00-2341, 00-2568 and 00-2569Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMichael, Circuit Judge
I concur in parts I, II, and III.A. of the majority opinion, but I respectfully dissent from part III.B. The jury’s verdict against the school board on Title IX should be reinstated because (1) Malone (the principal) had actual knowledge of a substantial risk of sexual abuse to students in her elementary school and (2) she had the authority to institute corrective measures to eliminate the risk.
Title IX provides that “[n]o person ... shall, on the basis of sex ... be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” 20 U.S.C. §…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Davis Ex Rel. LaShonda D. v. Monroe County Board of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Rosa H., Individually and as Next Friend of Deborah H. v. San Elizario Independent School District, San Elizario Independent School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1997
- Lentz v. MorrisSupreme Court of Virginia · 1988
- Doe v. School Administrative District No. 19District Court, D. Maine · 1999
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.