S.J. v. Lafayette: Another Example of Failure to See the Forrest for the Trees

Abstract

For many years parents have been leaving their children under the supervision of educators. These parents leave their children under the assumption that the school will be held liable for any harm that their children suffer while under the school’s supervision. The school is expected to provide reasonable care and is sometimes considered surrogate parents. With the Louisiana Supreme Court’s ruling in S.J. v. Lafayette School Board, many parents will now be confused about where a school’s liability begins and ends. This case blurred the lines of liability when it determined that a school is not liable for a child who was raped after leaving the school’s premises although the school denied the child transportation and was told by the child’s mother to not let her walk home. Who now should be liable when incidents like this occur and the child has not yet entered into the custody of the parent?The author’s perspective is different from the court’s standpoint. The court found that the school denying C.C. a ride home, which essentially violated the statute that guaranteed students a ride home who lived more than a mile away, did not amount to an action in negligence. Taking into account all other elements that were breached, such as not being able to use the phone and letting C.C. leave the school premises alone while in the school’s care, it is the author’s position that the school breached its duty to provide reasonable care.