Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► [ Ссылка ]

Christensen v. Royal School District No. 160 | 124 P.3d 283 (2005)

Negligence doesn’t exist without a legal duty. Schools, for example, have a duty to protect the children in their care. But do students also have a responsibility to protect themselves from their teachers? The defendant in Christensen versus Royal School District thought they should.

Thirteen-year-old Leslie Christensen was in eighth grade at Royal Middle School, in Washington’s Royal School District Number One-Sixty. Steven Diaz, twenty-six, was Leslie’s teacher. On several occasions, Diaz engaged in sexual activity with Leslie in his classroom. Diaz claimed that Leslie participated willingly.

Leslie and her parents sued Diaz and the district in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. The Christensens alleged sexual abuse against Diaz and negligent hiring and supervision against the district. The district asserted an affirmative defense of contributory fault against Leslie under Washington’s tort reform act, based on her alleged voluntary participation in sexual activity with Diaz. Leslie moved for summary judgment on the contributory fault issue. The district court certified to the Washington Supreme Court the question of whether contributory fault could be ascribed to Leslie.

Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: [ Ссылка ]

The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► [ Ссылка ]

Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: [ Ссылка ]

Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► [ Ссылка ]
Quimbee Case Brief App ► [ Ссылка ]
Facebook ► [ Ссылка ]
Twitter ► [ Ссылка ]
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries

свернуть