N.Z. v. Madison Bd. of Educ.
2017 Ohio 6992
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Student (a Madison High School pupil) was emergency-removed Oct. 9, 2015 after a teacher found a binder in a school stairwell labeled “Klebold Surprise” (references to Columbine). Administrators investigated and discovered Student participated in a private Kik group that glorified school violence and contained racist, sexual, and weapons-related content.
- Administrators confiscated phones, involved law enforcement, and interviewed multiple students; the investigation disrupted school activities and followed recent bomb/shooter threats in the district.
- Student was given an emergency removal hearing Oct. 16, 2015, then suspended 10 days (Oct. 19–30) with a recommendation for expulsion; Superintendent scheduled an expulsion hearing (notice mailed Oct. 20; hearing Oct. 30), and Student was expelled Nov. 2–Jan. 8 with conditions for re-enrollment.
- Student (through Mother) administratively appealed to the Board and then to the common pleas court under R.C. Chapter 2506, arguing (1) due process violations under R.C. 3313.66/handbook timing/notice rules and (2) First Amendment free-speech violation for disciplining off-campus online speech.
- Trial court upheld the Board’s expulsion as supported by substantial, reliable evidence, finding no denial of due process and that the school permissibly regulated off-campus speech because the private speech reached and threatened the school community; this appeal affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whether emergency removal/suspension/expulsion violated due process timing/notice requirements (R.C. 3313.66/handbook) | Mother: school failed to provide required written notice and hearings within statutory/handbook timeframes, depriving Student of due process | School: provided oral and written notice as soon as practicable; interruptions (holidays, bomb threats) justified timing; Student had opportunity to be heard and counselled | Court: No due process violation — notices/hearings were timely and Student not prejudiced by short delays | |
| Whether suspension exceeded permissible pre-hearing removal period (de facto expulsion) | Mother: days between removal and formal suspension converted removal into an unlawfully long suspension | Mother: delay amounted to extra punishment without due process | School: removal days were part of emergency removal; suspension proper after hearing; no prejudice | Court: No abuse — removal days were emergency removal, not an unlawful extension of suspension |
| Whether expulsion hearing scheduling violated handbook/statute (3–5 day window) | Mother: expulsion hearing occurred later than handbook/statute prescribes, denying rights | School: notice and hearing occurred within a reasonable time; Student was under suspension and represented; no prejudice | Court: Delay not prejudicial; procedural timing defect did not invalidate process | |
| Whether disciplining Student for off-campus online speech violated First Amendment | Mother: Kik group was private off-campus speech; school lacked authority to punish it | School: private speech entered school (binder left on campus, in-school texts warning members), occurring amid recent threats; school could reasonably foresee disruption and protect students | Court: School permissibly regulated speech; Tinker applies and expulsion was lawful given disruption/connection to school safety |
Key Cases Cited
- Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (U.S. 1975) (students facing suspension are entitled to notice and some hearing as due process)
- Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (U.S. 1969) (school may restrict student speech that materially and substantially disrupts school)
- Bethel Sch. Dist. No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (U.S. 1986) (schools may regulate vulgar or lewd student speech)
- Hazelwood School Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (U.S. 1988) (schools may regulate school‑sponsored student speech)
- Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (U.S. 2007) (schools may restrict student speech promoting illegal drug use)
- Bell v. Itawamba County School Board, 799 F.3d 379 (5th Cir. 2015) (Tinker can govern off‑campus speech intentionally directed at the school community that threatens/harasses)
- Wynar v. Douglas County School Dist., 728 F.3d 1062 (9th Cir. 2013) (schools may discipline for off‑campus threats of school violence under Tinker framework)
- C.R. v. Eugene School Dist. 4J, 835 F.3d 1142 (9th Cir. 2016) (off‑campus speech analysis is circumstance‑specific; apply Tinker if connection to school exists)
- Kowalski v. Berkeley County Schools, 652 F.3d 565 (4th Cir. 2011) (adopted a nexus test for disciplining off‑campus speech)
- Kisil v. Sandusky, 12 Ohio St.3d 30 (Ohio 1984) (standard of review for R.C. 2506 administrative appeals)