![]() Tommy’s parents also agreed to this decision on 22 nd October 1987. The classroom was specifically designed to cater to the needs of mentally disturbed persons who were considered to be educable at Bennettsville High School. As a result, the school decided to place him in a self-contained classroom. Following his promotion, the authorities realized that the student was having disciplinary problems ( Grooms v. His parents gave consent and supported the decision. In the following year, he was allowed to proceed to ninth grade at McColl-Fletcher Memorial High School. The program had been developed by the school to cater to the needs of learners with special needs like him. ![]() Since he was a special student, he was pursuing an individual education plan in the institution. At the time, Tommy was a 15-year-old mentally handicapped student ( Grooms v. The issues surrounding the case started way back in 1986. In addition, such a decision should not be made unless an evaluation of facts associated with the case proves that it is inevitable (Glannon, 2010). The decision to appeal was supported by the fact that a summary ruling can only be granted when it is clear that there are no genuine material facts to try the case (Glannon, 2010). The judgment by the trial court prompted Tommy to file an appeal. The judgments were granted on grounds that the plaintiff had failed to present any evidence showing that the institution had conducted itself in a manner that showed gross negligence in its duty to supervise the conduct of a student within its premises ( Grooms v. When the case was first heard, summary judgment was passed in favor of the school. Tommy sued the school for injuries that he had sustained while attending the learning institution. The other party is Marlboro County School District ( Grooms v. He is referred to as Tommy throughout the case. The plaintiff, John Thomas Grooms, is a mentally impaired student. Outside the classroom, the school administration is liable for any harm that may befall the students provided that they are still within the institution. Any injury sustained in class under circumstances that are preventable through the exercise of reasonable care will amount to negligence. When in class, it is the responsibility of the teacher to ensure that the students are safe. They should also be put under surveillance to ensure that they do not cause injuries to themselves or others. The institutions should put in place measures to ensure that the welfare of the students is addressed (Batten, 2011). Students with special needs, such as those with mental disorders, should be given special attention in school (“Colorado House approves,” 2015). The case involves negligence within a school environment. Several issues revolving around the suit will be discussed. To better understand tort laws and their relationship to negligence, the author of this paper will conduct a critical review of a case in this area. For this reason, negligence claims may fail if it is proven that the accident could not have been prevented through the exercise of reasonable care ( Scott v. ![]() It is also important to ensure that the damage in question is not remote to the act. The defendant must also be proven to have breached their duty resulting in the damage in question. The plaintiff must show that the defendant owed them the duty of care. It can be as a result of an action or omission. It is conceptualized as the failure by a party to behave in a manner that shows the level of care similar to that which would be exhibited by a person under similar circumstances. In the legal world, negligence has a specific definition. Tort law has in the past been employed in suits involving negligence (Linden & Feldthusen, 2011). Marlboro County School District” Analysis essay written 100% from scratch Get help ![]() In only 3 hours we’ll deliver a custom “Grooms vs. It is also common practice to find the plaintiff in such cases suing for monetary damages. To achieve this, the offended party can petition a court to prevent the defendant from committing such tortious acts in the future (Batten, 2011). Tort laws also discourage people from committing similar acts for fear of being held liable for damages. They compensate for the damages incurred following the act in question. The primary objective of these legislations is to provide relief to the offended party. It often results in a legal suit by the party against which the act was committed. Impacts of the Case on Future Legal DecisionsĪ tort is a wrongful act that causes loss or harm to an individual. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |