EDUCATIONAL MALPRACTICE: A NEW TORT BASED ON TRADITIONAL NEGLIGENCE THEORY

Peter W. v. San Francisco Unified School District('1) was the first case of its kind where a student sought to bring suit against a public school system for failure to provide him with an adequate education. In 1976 the California Court of Appeals denied recognition of a cause of action in Peter W. based on public policy factors, holding that there existed no legal duty for educators to provide students with an adequate education. Similar cases have followed with the same results; yet the fact remains that there is a class of victims who have failed to learn and have been left without remedy.;It was found that authorities agree that the rejection standards can be overcome by properly pleading procedural and substantive elements of a traditional negligence cause of action. They assert that the courts' rationale for denial based on public policy factors was conveniently adopted to avoid further entanglement in educational matters. The authors urge that cases alleging academic injury be reviewed on a case by case basis, minimizing previous legal precedent, with emphasis on the need for legal intervention as a deterrent to negligent acts in the student-school relationship.;They also suggest that the first successful cause of action will probably be recognized when the courts are confronted with a fact pattern that on its face reflects obvious negligence. Such a fact.;pattern has been assimilated in the final chapter drawn from the arguments of authors examined in this study.;The purpose of this study was to determine the potential for legal recognition of a cause of action for educational malpractice based on traditional negligence theory. Specific court cases were searched to determine the extent to which educational malpractice has been pleaded and various academic injuries alleged. From the judicial rationale, rejection standards were derived to which all future arguments must be directed for an educational malpractice suit to become successful. Literature and research was investigated to determine the scope of material in the area of educational malprac- tice and was subsequently examined to extract the arguments of authorities based on traditional negligence theory which are responsive to the rejection standards.;('1)Peter W. v. San Francisco Unified School District, 60 Cal. App. 3d 814, 131 Cal. Rptr. 854 (1976).