Patel Ex Rel. A.H. v. Kent School District
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 14172
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- A.H., a developmentally disabled high-school student, attended Kentridge High School in Kent School District under a special-education plan.
- Patel alleges the school failed to supervise A.H., leading to multiple unsupervised bathroom encounters with a similarly disabled student and a boy named Matt.
- The school previously implemented an IEP with heightened supervision; in sophomore year, supervision was reduced and then reinstated after Patel's concerns.
- During spring 2007, A.H. reportedly had five sexual encounters with Matt in a bathroom next to Wilhelm's classroom; Wilhelm supervised in part but allegedly allowed brief unsupervised trips.
- Patel removed A.H. from the school and reported the incidents to authorities; Patel then sued in state court for various claims and § 1983 against Wilhelm asserting a due process violation.
- The district court granted Wilhelm summary judgment on the § 1983 claim; the remaining state-law claims were dismissed without prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether special-relationship exception applies | Patel argues A.H. was in state custody under DeShaney. | Wilhelm contends compulsory attendance and in loco parentis do not create custody. | Special relationship does not apply; no custody under DeShaney. |
| Whether state-created danger exception applies | Wilhelm allegedly created or failed to prevent danger to A.H. | No deliberate indifference; no known danger Wilhelm could foresee. | State-created danger not established; deliberate indifference not shown. |
| What governs Patel's remaining claims if § 1983 fails | Claims should proceed under state tort law. | Constitutional claim is precluded; proceed in state court for torts. | § 1983 claim dismissed; state tort claims remain for state court. |
Key Cases Cited
- DeShaney v. Winnebago Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 489 U.S. 189 (U.S. 1989) (special-relationship limits; state not liable for omissions absent custody)
- Grubbs v. Kennedy, 92 F.3d 900 (9th Cir. 1996) (deliberate indifference standard for state-created danger)
- Munger v. City of Glasgow Police Dep't, 227 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2000) (general rule: state not liable for omissions)
- Kennedy v. City of Ridgefield, 439 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 2006) (deliberate indifference requires known or obvious danger)
- Penilla v. City of Huntington Park, 115 F.3d 707 (9th Cir. 1997) (material fact question on deliberate indifference in emergency response)
- Wood v. Ostrander, 879 F.2d 583 (9th Cir. 1989) (recognizes state-created danger doctrine)
- Middle Bucks Area Vocational-Technical Sch., 972 F.2d 1364 (3d Cir. 1992) (custody not created by school attendance or in loco parentis)
- DeShaney v. Winnebago Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. (Middle Bucks), 489 U.S. 200 (U.S. 1989) (custody threshold requires restraint of liberty)