Comments on: Hit by car playing hooky, suit blames school

By: Mike T

Mike T — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:59:23 +0000

boblipton,

Unfortunately, the doctrine of in loco parentis may complicate this case because it places the parents as legal guardians of the minor while the school is supposed to have custody.

By: Soul

Soul — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:14:33 +0000

There is not enough information. If the kid was not on school property, should they not have let the parents know. I think they are required by law to do so. Depending on circumstances, I don’t think this case is quite silly enough to be scrapped without a hearing.

By: Sunday Links | The Agitator

Sunday Links | The Agitator — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 14:08:40 +0000

[…] Teen hit, killed by car while playing hooky. Parents sue the school. […]

By: Adam Zur

Adam Zur — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 12:49:35 +0000

I am pretty sure that according to the Talmud we hold by rabbi meir that causing indirectly damage is held responsible for some part of the damage. And in this case it seems to me that if the parents had not sent their child to school they would have been slapped with a court summons and jail time.–beside the fact that the girl was in fact nine years old. I am not a lawyer and I don’t know American law and it would take me some time to figure out how American law would really have to deal with this based on the Constitution. I am guessing the Constitution would say that the the individual States would have to determine the case. But let me just say that Ron Miller definitely has a point about the fact that it did not happen on school property.

By: Ron Miler

Ron Miler — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:45:15 +0000

JT, I love that. Juries are regular Americans. So, the American people are stupid. The American people are dishonest. Really, why do we let these people vote? JT, how dumb do you think the 7th Amendment is? Where is King George when we need him the most?

Mike, I think people presume that. But lawyers filing suits to make defendants “avoid embarrassment” generally don’t get good cases. The school boards have a lot of claims they litigate that make them look a lot worse. Ultimately, does this really make the school look bad. I don’t think so.

By: J.T. Wenting

J.T. Wenting — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 10:35:32 +0000

“This case will fail because it does not make sense. The law usually – obviously not always – gets in right”

no, it will succeed because 10 dishonest jurors see dollar signs in their eyes imagining similar things they themselves may think up to sue about.
What about sueing your kids’ school for them failing to graduate because the school “should have taken more diligent care that they did their homework”?

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 03:07:34 +0000

Answer to Ron “Here, whatever actually caused the death – driver or boy’s negligence – will be seen as an intervening superseding case. This case will never make it to a jury.”
The point is not getting to a jury, the point and intent of the lawsuit is to embarrass/expense the school district to the point at which they will settle.Demand : $1 mill.
They will settle for $150K, maybe less.

By: Richard Nieporent

Richard Nieporent — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 18:41:51 +0000

RN:”It is a school, not a prison”

What’s the difference?

The prison has better food. 🙂

By: Mannie

Mannie — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:15:44 +0000

I think a better case can be made for finding the parents derelict in their duty to make the kid go to school. And I don’t think much of that case, either.

By: Jack Wilson

Jack Wilson — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 16:44:11 +0000

RN:”It is a school, not a prison”

What’s the difference?