1 / 6

Analyzing a Court Decision

Analyzing a Court Decision. An overview of Out of School Offenses presented by Bart Fennemore. Out-of-School Offenses. Case: Tibbs v. Board of Education of the Township of Franklin Court: 276 A.2d 165 (N.J. Super. Ct. 1971) Students were assaulted outside of school

halen
Télécharger la présentation

Analyzing a Court Decision

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Analyzing a Court Decision An overview of Out of School Offenses presented by Bart Fennemore

  2. Out-of-School Offenses • Case: Tibbs v. Board of Education of the Township of Franklin • Court: 276 A.2d 165 (N.J. Super. Ct. 1971) • Students were assaulted outside of school • Court agreed that the school can punish students for out-of-school physical abuse to others. • Expulsion is not permitted based on unsigned and unidentified statements from student witnesses. • Case: McLean Independent School District v. Andrews • Court: 333 S.W.2d 886 (Tx. Civ. App. 1960) • Student suspended for parking off campus which violated school policy. • Court upheld the suspension on the basis of promoting the safety of student pedestrians.

  3. Out-of-School Offenses • Case: McNaughton v. Circleville Board of Education • Court: 345 N.E.2d 649 (Ohio Comm. Pleas 1974 an appellate court) • Students suspended from school and extracurricular activities for hazing new students of an official school club off school grounds. • The faculty advisor was not present for nor had knowledge of the initiation. • Case: Warren v. National Association of Secondary School Principals • Court: 375 F.Supp. 1043 (Tex. 1974) pp. 196 • Student was dismissed from National Honor Society for drinking. • Due process was not given and the student was reinstated and the incident was expunged from his record.

  4. Out-of-School Offenses • Case: R.R. v. Board of Education of the Shore Regional High School District • Court: 263 A.2d 180 (N.J. Sup. Ct. Ch. Div. 1970) • Allowed to expel or suspend students for out-of-school incidents for physical and emotional safety or well-being of student as well as others in their contact. • Student readmitted because due process was violated. • Case: S. v. Board of Education, san Francisco Unified School District • Court: 97 Cal. Rptr. 422 (Cal. Ct. App. 1971) • Court upheld a suspension that did not distinguish between events that occurred on campus or off.

  5. Out-of-School Offenses • Case: Caldwell v. Cannady • Court: 340 F. Supp. 835 (Tex. 1972) • “Upheld the reasonableness of a local school board policy mandating the expulsion of any student possessing, using, or selling dangerous or narcotic drugs.” • Case: Clements v. Board of Trustees of the Sheridan County School District No. 2 • Court: 585 P.2d 197 (Wyo. 1978 – Supreme Court of Wyoming) • “Court held that school authorities may discipline pupils for out-of-school conduct having a direct or immediate effect on the discipline or general welfare of the school.”

  6. Issue of Double Jeopardy • Courts have allowed for both judicial and school sanctions without violation of the Fifth Amendment as the court serves punitive effects and school have civil or remedial effects that protect the school environment.

More Related