PHOENIX \u2014 Schools aren\u2019t responsible for keeping students safe when they\u2019re en route to school \u2014 or even just outside the school boundaries \u2014 the Arizona Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.<\/p>\n
In a unanimous decision, the justices said schools are liable for providing safe conditions when students are on campus or, at the very least, exercising custody or control over them.<\/p>\n
But Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer said that\u2019s not the case when a student is injured while crossing the street \u2014 even one adjacent to the school.<\/p>\n
Timmer acknowledged the Phoenix Union High School District was aware that some parents, seeking to avoid lines, were dropping their youngsters off in a dirt lot crosswalk there.<\/p>\n
She said none of that, however, creates any sort of legal duty on the school to protect the student from danger.<\/p>\n
Tuesday\u2019s ruling sets a new statewide precedent.<\/p>\n
Timmer said the justices have never addressed this situation before. In fact, the decision overturns a contrary ruling by the state Court of Appeals that concluded the student\u2019s parents did have a right to sue.<\/p>\n
According to court records, the student, identified only as CJ, was a freshman at Betty Fairfax High School in Laveen.<\/p>\n
The area in the morning, according to Timmer, was hectic, with some parents dropping their kids off in the parking lot adjacent to school. But other parents, seeking to avoid the line into the school grounds, pulled into a dirt lot across 59th Avenue, with students jaywalking across the street.<\/p>\n
\u201cBFHS officials did not tell parents to drop their children off at the dirt lot,\u201d the justice wrote. \u201cBut they were aware of the practice and did nothing to stop or warn parents or students that the practice was unsafe.\u201d<\/p>\n
\n
CJ, in jaywalking in August 2021, was struck by a vehicle and suffered serious and permanent injuries.<\/p>\n
His father, in filing suit, claimed the district had some control over whether to pursue safer options for students coming and going from school ground or at least warn students of the traffic dangers.<\/p>\n
What\u2019s clear in the law, Timmer wrote, is while schools have a duty to protect students, that is not without limits.<\/p>\n
\u201cA school owes a duty to protect students when a known and tangible risk of harm endangers them while under the school\u2019s custody and control,\u201d she wrote. \u201cThat duty exists most often when students are injured while at school or participating in off-campus school-sponsored activities.\u201d<\/p>\n
But she said there are \u201crarer circumstances\u201d where a duty to protect students exists while a student is under the \u201ccustody and control\u201d but an injury occurs while the student is outside that custody and control.<\/p>\n
That she said, was not the case here.<\/p>\n
Timmer said all the evidence was the high school had reasonably safe means if ingress and egress, with multiple entrances and exits for pedestrians and vehicle. And she said nothing about these created a \u201ctangible risk of harm\u201d that endangered CJ and resulted in his injuries.<\/p>\n
While a risk of harm from jaywalking existed in front of the school, \u201cit existed everywhere along the routes students take from home to school,\u201d Timmer said, adding the risk was not created by the configuration of entrances and exits \u201cbut from the fact that crossing a street outside a crosswalk creates the risk of being hit by a car.\u201d<\/p>\n
The fact traffic backed up on 59th Avenue because of drivers wanting to go into the parking lot did not make the ingress and egress at the school unreasonably dangerous.<\/p>\n
\u201cCJ was not entering BFHS at the time of the accident; he was traveling to a school entrance,\u201d Timmer wrote.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis is a distinction with a meaningful difference,\u201d she said. \u201cA school does not have a duty to protect students from dangers that arise when the school is not exercising custody or control over the student.\u201d<\/p>\n
Howard Fischer<\/p>\n