Legal Opinion · Dissent

N.L. v. Bethel School District

Washington Supreme Court

Decided September 1, 2016No. 91775-2Published

1DissentMadsen, C.J.

¶32 (dissenting) — I agree with the majority that schools have a “duty to protect their students from the foreseeable risk of harm the students may inflict on each other.” Majority at 430. However, the majority extends this duty to protect students from harms inflicted when students are not in a school’s custody. This expands the scope of a school district’s duty further than our case law warrants and exposes school districts to liability for events over which they have no control. Because I would hold that school districts do not owe a duty to protect students who *440are not in their custody…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Whalen v. RoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  2. Hartley v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Hertog v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  4. HERTOG, EX REL., SAH v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  5. McLeod v. Grant County School District No. 128Washington Supreme Court · 1953

31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API