Teacher cuts girls hair without permission

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

That's what I would argue, but if there is any kind of history that the teacher was antagonistic towards the girl then I think respondeat superior...So do you go for the bench trial or the jury if your the plaintiff?

Sorry second part I don't do tort, but if I did in this case, jury.

Best cause of action is Intentional Inflection of Emotional Distress.

Good plaintiff lawyer would of course focus in on the "emotional" which is usually works best with a jury.

However, you skipped over whether a Christian should/would sue in a case such as this and to what end? Just because a suit CAN be filed does not always mean it should.

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

Test for respondeat superior:


1. Was the act committed within the time and space limits of the agency?

2. Was the offense incidental to, or of the same general nature as, the responsibilities the agent is authorized to perform?

3. Was the agent motivated to any degree to benefit the principal by committing the act?


Obviously fails on 2 and 3, not to mention the teacher would be considered a quasi-governmental employee and therefore burden against school would have to higher than "normal" employer.

But good try grasshopper !!! :-)

I just had a thought James. The article said the teacher had been singling her out about her hair. I just wonder if she or her parents had ever told the principal or anyone else at the school before this happened? If so would they then be responsible? And would this not be considered "bully" behavior on the part of the teacher?

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

Sorry second part I don't do tort, but if I did in this case, jury.

Best cause of action is Intentional Inflection of Emotional Distress.

Good plaintiff lawyer would of course focus in on the "emotional" which is usually works best with a jury.

However, you skipped over whether a Christian should/would sue in a case such as this and to what end? Just because a suit CAN be filed does not always mean it should.

Personally, unless the school really did have some responsibility, no I wouldn’t. It's not like a child has lost a limb and money damages are being used for medical bills, prosthetics, etc. Money restores nothing here. However regardless of whether punitive damages would be available, if the school looked the other way and allowed this to happen, then the answer would be yes.

you know the drill the answer is always "it depends"

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

It is impossible to speak to another's circumstance.

Personally, I hope that in such a situation I would have the grace to do exactly that.

Some would no doubt feel it almost unAmerican to not "get what's coming to you".

For others I think it would depend somewhat on the teacher's response.

Personally, I think they (the family) should forgive this teacher. Love covers!

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

Test for respondeat superior:


1. Was the act committed within the time and space limits of the agency?

2. Was the offense incidental to, or of the same general nature as, the responsibilities the agent is authorized to perform?

3. Was the agent motivated to any degree to benefit the principal by committing the act?


Obviously fails on 2 and 3, not to mention the teacher would be considered a quasi-governmental employee and therefore burden against school would have to higher than "normal" employer.

But good try grasshopper !!! :-)

What are you doing now that you aren't practicing law in Texas?

[SDG]

Originally Posted by cneasttx

I just had a thought James. The article said the teacher had been singling her out about her hair. I just wonder if she or her parents had ever told the principal or anyone else at the school before this happened? If so would they then be responsible? And would this not be considered "bully" behavior on the part of the teacher?

This is where it's going to get a little messy ...

Will we have to accept the girl's word that she was being "bullied"? Are there witnesses ?... is this first time she had approached adults w/ this ...??? ...

is there a paper trail that indicates that this was a problem prior to the alleged crime

... emails will most probably be subpoenaed if this goes to court

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by cneasttx

I just had a thought James. The article said the teacher had been singling her out about her hair. I just wonder if she or her parents had ever told the principal or anyone else at the school before this happened? If so would they then be responsible? And would this not be considered "bully" behavior on the part of the teacher?

Hey Cindy,

It would be fact specific. Even if teacher had been teasing was it foreseeable she would cut?

As for everything else, once again it depends.

As a general rule it is much harder to go against a governmental institution. Which personally in the grand scheme of things I think is a good thing.

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Personally, unless the school really did have some responsibility, no I wouldn’t. It's not like a child has lost a limb and money damages are being used for medical bills, prosthetics, etc. Money restores nothing here. However regardless of whether punitive damages would be available, if the school looked the other way and allowed this to happen, then the answer would be yes.

you know the drill the answer is always "it depends"

LOL yes you have Lawyer Answer 101 down pat:

"It Depends"

People get frustrated but seldom realize the tremendous difference even a slight variation in facts can make.

[Cindy]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

Hey Cindy,

It would be fact specific. Even if teacher had been teasing was it foreseeable she would cut?

As for everything else, once again it depends.

As a general rule it is much harder to go against a governmental institution. Which personally in the grand scheme of things I think is a good thing.

OK, I hadn't thought of that, it being foreseeable I mean.
I don't think many go against the state of Texas and win.
I do agree with your last statement.

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by cneasttx

OK, I hadn't thought of that, it being foreseeable I mean.
I don't think many go against the state of Texas and win.
I do agree with your last statement.

With Right case, right cause.

The local ISD, municipalities, even the IRS can be successfully litigated against.

:-)