Daniels v. Gordon

Decision Date09 June 1998
Docket NumberNo. A98A0566.,A98A0566.
Citation503 S.E.2d 72,232 Ga. App. 811
PartiesDANIELS v. GORDON et al.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Melvyn J. Williams, Forest Park, for appellant.

Chambless, Higdon & Carson, Mary M. Katz, Macon, for appellees. RUFFIN, Judge.

Jace Daniels, a minor, claimed that while he was a student at the Macon County Middle School, his teacher, Mary Haigler, physically restrained and choked him, thereby causing him physical and emotional injuries. Jace's father, Edward Daniels, sued Haigler and the school principal, Dale Gordon, on his son's behalf. Gordon and Haigler both argued that they were entitled to official immunity. The trial court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment, and Daniels appeals. We affirm.

"To prevail at summary judgment under OCGA § 9-11-56, the moving party must demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and the undisputed facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, warrant judgment as a matter of law. OCGA § 9-11-56(c).... A defendant who will not bear the burden of proof at trial need not affirmatively disprove the nonmoving party's case; instead, the burden on the moving party may be discharged by pointing out by reference to the affidavits, depositions and other documents in the record that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party's case. If the moving party discharges this burden, the nonmoving party cannot rest on its pleadings, but rather must point to specific evidence giving rise to a triable issue. OCGA § 9-11-56(e)." Lau's Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491, 405 S.E.2d 474 (1991).

In this case, Daniels asserted in his complaint and brief in opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment that in October 1996 while Jace was enrolled in Haigler's class, he was improperly and intentionally disciplined by Haigler. According to Daniels, "Jace was physically-restrained and choked, experiencing pain and suffering, along with humiliation, in front of his classmates...." Jace received medical treatment for neck pain which allegedly arose from the incident. Daniels submitted the affidavit of Dr. Crystal Brown who examined Jace in December 1996. Dr. Brown stated that Jace had soreness in the neck area with muscle spasm, for which she prescribed therapy and medication.

Daniels maintained, inter alia, that Haigler's actions constituted a violation of Georgia law governing corporal punishment, OCGA § 20-2-730 et seq. Daniels also averred in his complaint that Gordon was "charged with the responsibility for disseminating school rules and enforcing school policy" but had taken no action against Haigler for disciplining Jace. However, Daniels failed to cite to any affidavits, depositions or other evidence to substantiate his assertions that Haigler choked Jace as opposed to merely grasping his face, that Jace's injuries were caused by the alleged choking incident, or that Gordon failed in his responsibilities concerning enforcement of school policy.

In contrast, the defendants cited Haigler's affidavit. Haigler stated that she has ten years of teaching experience. On the day of the incident Jace was in a class of 26 students, which Haigler said "created a special problem as far as discipline, because it was difficult to isolate a disruptive student physically from the other students." According to Haigler, Jace was a "perennial problem in the class, misbehaving and disrupting other students. He sang, made noises, and passed gas. He often refused to work on assignments, and otherwise refused to follow directions." Haigler said that on the day of the incident, Jace was misbehaving as usual. She "admonished him several times, to no avail." The computers in Haigler's class shut down, and while she was trying to get them back on line, Jace was creating problems and another student complained about him. According to Haigler, Jace ignored her attempts to get him to behave. She said that "after I got the computers back on-line, I asked Jace to sit down as he was standing next to my desk. He did not, and in fact would not even look at me. I reached up to his face (he is taller than me), [sic] grasped his face with my thumbs on his cheek bones and my fingers splayed across his cheeks and turned his head to face me. I then told him to listen to me. My intention was to get his attention and I did not intend this as discipline. He did not indicate at the time that this caused any physical injury."

The defendants also submitted the affidavit of the emergency room physician who treated Jace the day after the incident. This physician said that his examination did not reveal any visible injury. He continued, noting that there were no bruises, inflammation or abrasions. The x-rays of Jace's neck were normal, as were the neurological examination results.

1. We find that Haigler's actions in this case did not amount to corporal punishment such that the provisions of OCGA § 20-2-730 et seq. would apply. "Corporal punishment plainly means physical, as opposed to pecuniary, punishment. [Cit.]" Simmons v. Vancouver School Dist. No. 37, 41 Wash. App. 365, 704 P.2d 648, 653 (1985). Black's Law Dictionary (5th ed.) also defines the term as "any kind of punishment of or inflicted on the body." To "punish" means "subjecting someone to loss of freedom or money or to physical pain for wrongdoing." American Heritage Dictionary (2nd college ed.).

While paddling and spanking are not the only methods of corporal punishment, not all physical contact instigated by an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Barnett v. Caldwell
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • January 29, 2018
    ...with actual malice or intent to cause injury. McDowell v. Smith , 285 Ga. 592, 593, 678 S.E.2d 922 (2009) ; Daniels v. Gordon , 232 Ga. App. 811, 813, 503 S.E.2d 72 (1998) ; Davis v. Dublin City Bd. of Educ. , 219 Ga. App. 121, 122, 464 S.E.2d 251 (1995).Accordingly, in cases like this one ......
  • Daily v. Board of Educ. of Morrill County School Dist. No. 62-0063
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • February 5, 1999
    ...in addressing the issue of corporal punishment, have consistently focused on the punitive intent of the teacher. In Daniels v. Gordon, 232 Ga.App. 811, 503 S.E.2d 72 (1998), the appellate court found that a teacher had grasped a student's face and turned the student's head to face her. The ......
  • Miller v. City of Atlanta
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia
    • September 29, 2022
    ...duty, or (2) act with actual malice or actual intent to cause injury while performing a discretionary function.” Daniels v. Gordon, 232 Ga.App. 811, 813 (1998) (citing Teston v. Collins, 217 Ga.App. 829, (1995)); see also Chisolm v. Tippens, 289 Ga.App. 757, 760 (2008) (citing Nichols v. Pr......
  • D.C.H. v. Jones
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Georgia
    • March 7, 2013
    ...duty."). Moreover, teachers engage in discretionary actions when they supervise, monitor, and control students. Daniels v. Gordon, 503 S.E.2d 72, 75 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998) ("[T]he general task imposed on teachers to monitor, supervise, and control students [is] a discretionary action which is ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Local Government Law - R. Perry Sentell, Jr.
    • United States
    • Mercer University School of Law Mercer Law Reviews No. 51-1, September 1999
    • Invalid date
    ...school officials' disciplinary duties." Id. 315. Id., 501 S.E.2d at 553. The court affirmed summary judgment for defendants. Id. 316. 232 Ga. App. 811, 503 S.E.2d 72 (1998). 317. Id. at 813, 503 S.E.2d at 75. First, the court held the teacher's conduct not to amount to corporal punishment; ......
  • "official Immunity" in Local Government Law: a Quantifiable Confrontation
    • United States
    • Georgia State University College of Law Georgia State Law Reviews No. 22-3, March 2006
    • Invalid date
    ...the scope of their official authority, and done without willfulness, malice or corruption.'" Id. at 125 (quoting Daniels v. Gordon, 503 S.E.2d 72 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998)) (emphasis added). 97. Id. at 125. Rather, they "acted only with the justifiable intent which occurs in every case of self-de......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT