This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Personal Injury
School Incident
Negligence

Clemon Young v. Los Angeles Unified School District

Published: Nov. 12, 2021 | Result Date: Oct. 26, 2021 |

Case number: 19STCV06263 Summary Judgment –  Defense

Judge

Daniel M. Crowley

Court

Los Angeles County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Anthony Willoughby
(Willoughby & Associates)


Defendant

James A. Hunt
(LAUSD Office of General Counsel)

Michael A. McLean
(LAUSD Office of General Counsel)


Facts

Clemon Young, Jr. was a 17-year-old student in the 11th grade at Carson Senior High School when between class periods he was struck by another student without warning or provocation. This lead to a fist fight that lasted thirty seconds, at which point Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) security personnel stopped the fight. Young was seen and evaluated by a LASUD nurse, and his family was notified and advised to take him to urgent care or an ER for further evaluation. Shortly, Young returned to playing full contact football. At the time of the incident, Mr. Ron Cruz was in the area monitoring the students. He did not observe the fight but arrived moments after it had begun and broke it up immediately. Thereafter, he radioed for assistance for the Los Angeles School Police and a nurse. Young filed an action against LAUSD alleging negligence and failure to follow mandatory duties. LASUD moved for summary judgment and the motion is unopposed.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that defendant caused his injuries when it failed to supervise or when it ineffectively supervised the students. Plaintiff contended defendant had a mandatory duty to protect against a risk of injury. Plaintiff made no opposition to defendant's motion.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied all of the contentions. Defendant contended that plaintiff cannot establish that it breached a duty or that any breached caused plaintiff's injuries. Defendant contended that there was no indication that a fight was going to happen and that the incident occurred very quickly. Defendant contended that plaintiff had not identified any valid alleged mandatory duty and had not provided facts or evidence to demonstrate or prove a failure to adhere to mandatory duties.

Result

Defendant's motion for summary judgment was granted.


#138033

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390