Dear Sir t

while bring tram- gular sohool burer inter-8ohool galM8. aot that a portion ent body ua8 insured 01 bard OaU8Q 8aid rlct to bo liable tar a rtudent not 80 ln- ttar or sept8mb6r 8, loso, 8 Department l 8to rh6ther 1n&Uie8 reoelvsd by 8tU- l llng to and rrom 1939, OpilliOII NO. 0-3 Va8 8Ont t0 PU. y di8OU88ed thr authoritbr in thir State epondent rohool dlrtrlot oannot be held by a 8tudont. It 18 th6 uries rU8tainad that the rule ret down in thi8 prior partmnt oovbr lnjurle8 8U8taln8d while p~rtiolpating in rootball or other athletio Said rule wanld Ed80 wnte8t8. in case8 Whar8 tha 8tud8nt wa8 lnjurmd in bing ttan8rQTrOd apply to and mm a r00tbai grrme In a regular 8ohool bU8.

TOU inquire a80 nh8thar th inOt that p-t Of the 8tn- dent body W88 h8UrOd by the sohool board would rQndor the 8chool dirtriot llabla for an injury 8U8tailWd by a 8tUdmt llOt W lruured. *2 tionorable T. ii. Triable, Yagr 2

It is tha opinion of thi8 CqnirtzY3nt thht beoauaotbs 8OhoOl cannot be l&b18 in tort, it would make no dirrerenoe di8triCt whether or not part of the Btudent body war insured as rendrr- ing the eahool dietflot lfkble for an infury ruatainsd by one of tbo 8tudent.8 not 80 in8WCd.

Your8 very t rulf