Smith V. Coyle Pub. Sch., (US DIST. CT. OKLA. SEPT. 2021).
BACKGROUND: During a school trip to an event, a student hit another student in the head after he refused to return her cell phone. This incident was followed by events including threatening texts, and the suspension of the student from school. Multiple claims were filed involving multiple parties, including a claim by the student based on freedom of speech.
EVIDENCE: After hitting the other student, the student sent a group text that said: “IMMA KILL —- AND HOS MONOTONE VOICE. I’m gonna f***ing decapitate him. I’ve been nice this entire f***ing trip and when I ask for my f***ing phone politely I want my f***ing phone. I wish I woulda hit him harder.” The student was told she would be suspended three days for threatening text messages, but the suspension was later withdrawn.
COURT HOLDING: The Court noted that “minors are entitled to significant First Amendment protection,” and that “students enjoy robust First Amendments rights”, particularly “when the speech occurs off campus or via a personal cell phone to a private audience.” The court focused on whether the school’s actions to initially impose suspension caused enough injury that it would “chill a person of ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in that activity [of speech]”. The Court found no evidence that the initially imposed, but withdrawn, suspension caused any deterrence to the student of future speech, and therefore the court found no violation of Freedom of Speech protection.
I. T. K. V. Mounds Pub. Sch., (OKLA. SUP. CT., SEPT. 2019).
BACKGROUND: Minor school bus passenger who was hit by a school bus brought Governmental Tort Claims Act (“GTCA”) against school district. Minor sued for compensation due to injuries, but district court dismissed due to flaws under the GTCA.
EVIDENCE: Two weeks after the child was injured, the child’s attorney sent a demand letter to the Superintendent and school insurance adjuster. The Superintendent did not deliver the letter to the school clerk for the BOE, but proceeded to handle the matter with the insurance adjuster. The insurance adjuster wrote back within days, providing information and asking for more information. A year later the plaintiff sent another demand letter, and then filed the lawsuit several months thereafter. School district defended on basis that the tort claim had not been delivered to the clerk and that it was beyond allowable GTCA time.
COURT HOLDING: The Court found that delivery to the Superintendent was sufficient, as the Superintendent’s duties included temporary custody of financial documents seeking payment of money and proper directions for processing by district. However, while Court noted that a government’s request for more information can create a legitimate expectation that the time limits for GTCA action are toiled, in this case, the Court found that the plaintiff’s inaction to respond with such information timely barred their claims.
Ark Wrecking Co. of Okla., Inc. v. Vargas Constr. Co., Inc., (OKLA. SUP. CT., OCT. 2016)
BACKGROUND: Demolition subcontractor sued public school district and construction company, alleging that construction company, as general contractor, should have posted payment and performance bonds to protect subcontractor from nonpayment.
EVIDENCE: The Tulsa Public School District hired and subsequently paid a construction manager to perform a demolition project for the removal of Eisenhower school. The construction manager operantly failed to then pay the wrecking subcontractor that performed the work. The construction manager had not obtained payment or performance bonds on the project.
COURT HOLDING: The Court held that a subcontractor on a public works project cannot look to a public entity for payment of damages for the failure of the general contractor to secure a statutory payment bond. The Court reasoned that a subcontractor is charged with knowledge of the statutory duty of the contractor to provide a bond and that the jury may consider the subcontractor’s neglect in failing to personally verify whether a payment bond has been secured.
