NCJ Number
140731
Journal
School Safety Dated: (Fall 1992) Pages: 10-12
Date Published
1992
Length
3 pages
Annotation
The issue of who is liable must be resolved when a teacher is victimized in the line of duty.
Abstract
Two major features dominate the landscape of liability law with regard to violence against teachers: immunity from suit and public duty doctrine. Governmental immunity involves protection from ordinary liability suits, in part based on an 11th amendment guarantee that States are immune from liability suits brought against them in Federal courts. Most States have made immunity from liability suits conditional on circumstances and procedures. In general discussions of conditional immunity, two distinct immunity scenarios are usually helpful in illustrating the approaches. In the first setting, schools are given blanket immunity for all injuries that occur, provided that the injury occurs due to negligence rather than intentional employee conduct. In the second setting, schools are prepared to assume liability for injuries arising only out of specified activities, with immunity pertaining to everything else. The second setting accurately describes the situation in most States. Recent teacher injury cases arguing for liability have lost because of the so-called public duty doctrine. This doctrine, when combined with general immunity principles, creates an environment in which teachers assume the risk of attack and injury. All States have adopted some version of the public duty doctrine. The general trend is to do nothing rather than to address the subject and, in so doing, create a special duty. General requirements of the special duty exception to liability are identified. 8 endnotes