Rice v. Gans-Rugebregt, No. 233600 (Cal. Super. Ct. May 15, 2007)
A California state trial court has ruled that a student could not recover monetary damages under those provisions in the state’s education code guaranteeing all students an equal educational opportunity. Rebekah Rice, along with her parents Elden Rice and Katherine Rice, filed suit against Santa Rosa City Schools (SRCS), seeking monetary damages and declaratory relief. Rebekah claimed that she had been the victim of discrimination based on her religious affiliation during her time as a student at Maria Carillo High. The suit stemmed from an incident during Rebekah’s freshman humanities class. She alleged that during a class discussion about comparative religions, several classmates began teasing her about her Mormon faith. In response, Rebekah yelled out "That’s so gay" which prompted her teacher to include a note referencing the incident in Rebekah’s disciplinary file. The lawsuit sought monetary damages for the school’s failure to protect Rebekah from the teasing and injunctive relief requiring the disciplinary note to be pulled from Rebekah’s file based on the theory that Rebekah was singled out for punishment because of her religious beliefs.
The court, noting that monetary damages are only recoverable from a public entity, such as a school district or a private person acting on behalf of a school district, when the entity is under a mandatory duty imposed by statute. It found the language and legislative intent of the education code imposed a discretionary duty upon school districts. Additionally, references to monetary damages that were included in the original language of the code were subsequently removed prior to the code’s enactment. Even if monetary damages were available, the student failed to prove that the teacher had any knowledge of the teasing, and, therefore, the school did not breach its duty to protect her from teasing. The court denied the injunctive relief, noting that there was no evidence that Rebekah was singled out and that the injunctive relief would be moot because Rebekah had graduated. The suit raised claims involving two other incidents that the court quickly dismissed. The first incident occurred during Rebekah’s attendance of a presentation by the School Diversity Club on the subject of racial prejudice and stereotypes. During the presentation, which took place in the freshman humanities class as well, a student stood up, announced she is bisexual and said she thought it was wrong to say "It’s so gay" which prompted other students to tease Rebekah about the earlier incident. The suit claimed the school should have allowed Rebekah to opt-out of this presentation and once again asserted the teacher did not protect Rebekah from the teasing. However, the court rejected the student’s argument, finding opt-out provisions are only necessary for sex education courses. It also pointed out that the student had failed to prove the teacher was aware of the teasing. The second claim involved a search of Rebekah’s backpack by a teacher who she contended lacked probable cause. The court responded that even if the search did lack probable cause, a public employee, such as a teacher, is not liable for enforcing disciplinary rules.
Rice v. Gans-Rugebregt, No. 233600 (Cal. Super. Ct. May 15, 2007)
[Full opinion]
[Editor’s Note: Coverage of the decision and background on the suit are available below. Although earlier news reports couched the suit in terms of student free speech, the opinion indicates that the claims focused primarily on allegations of religion-based discrimination and infringement of religious rights.]
Boston Globe
By Lisa Leff (Associated Press)
[Full story]
[NSBA School Law pages on Rice v. Gans-Rugebregt]