Hill By and Through Webb v. Allen

Citation495 So.2d 32
Parties35 Ed. Law Rep. 851 Tamara "Tammy" HILL, a minor, who sues By and Through her mother and next friend, Linda WEBB, etc., et al. v. Ed ALLEN, et al. 85-100.
Decision Date01 August 1986
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Winston V. Legge, Jr. of Patton, Latham, Legge & Cole, Athens, for appellants.

Donna S. Pate and J.R. Brooks of Ford, Caldwell, Ford & Payne, Huntsville, for appellees.

BEATTY, Justice.

This is an appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment on the pleadings granted to certain defendants in plaintiffs' action to recover damages. That judgment on the pleadings was certified as final pursuant to Rule 54(b), A.R.Civ.P. We affirm.

Plaintiffs are six mentally retarded children who sued pro ami. The appellees are the members of the Cullman City Board of Education, the special education coordinator, the superintendent of the City Board of Education, and Stanley Johnson, principal of the John C. Cullman Middle School, all being sued in their official capacities.

The gist of plaintiffs' complaint was that these plaintiffs were enrolled at the John C. Cullman Middle School as special students, and that they were subjected to "numerous incidents of abuse, physical, mental, and sexual [by certain other defendants described as] instructors and aides ... charged with the responsibility of instructing and educating these ... children, under the laws of the State of Alabama." The complaint against the appellees alleged:

"8. Defendants, Ed Allen, Stanley Johnson, Richard Henderson, John Fricke, David Knight, Phil Freeman, Kay Steele, Barney Porter and the Cullman City Board of Education of Cullman, Alabama, are charged by law with the operation of the public schools in Cullman, Alabama, and had supervisory control and status as to these mentally retarded children, and in their respective capacities knew, or should have known, of the abuses inflicted upon, and suffered by, these mentally retarded children, and did fail to prevent, or to aid in preventing, the wrongs and abuses herein complained of, which they knew, or should have known, were occurring, and were about to continue to occur, and which they had the power to prevent, the action or inaction of these defendants being negligent, wanton or intentional. Numerous reports of incidents and other information were made available to these defendants from which these defendants knew, should have known, or with reasonable diligence could have ascertained, the plight of these mentally retarded children."

By amendment, plaintiffs added these charges:

"11. Defendant, Ed Allen, was at all times pertinent hereto, City Superintendent of Schools in the City of Cullman, Alabama. In such capacity, defendant Allen was, and continues to be, the Chief Executive Officer of the Cullman City Board of Education by Code of Alabama, 1975, as amended, Title 16-12-3. Defendant Allen was, and is, charged with the responsibility of visiting the public schools in Cullman, Alabama, and observing the management and instruction at same, as mandated by Code of Alabama, 1975, as amended, Title 16-12-11. Defendant Allen had, and has, authority to suspend principals, teachers and supervisors for cause and to recommend them for dismissal, pursuant to Code of Alabama, 1975, as amended, Title 16-12-16. Defendant Allen was, and is, responsible to see that the provisions of law for school attendance are enforced, pursuant to Code of Alabama, 1975, as amended, Title 16-12-18.

"12. The defendants in this action who were, and are, members of the City Board of Education of Cullman, Alabama, were, and are, charged with the general administration and supervision of the public schools and educational interest in Cullman, Alabama, by Code of Alabama, 1975, as amended, Title 16-11-2, and were, and are, vested with all powers necessary or proper for the administration and management of the free public schools in Cullman, Alabama, by Code of Alabama, 1975, as amended, Title 16-11-9, and had, and have, along with defendant Allen, the responsibility to prescribe rules and regulations for the conduct and management of the public schools in the City of Cullman, Alabama, by Code of Alabama, 1975, as amended, Title 16-11-18.

"....

"14. Defendants failed or refused to take appropriate action to protect mentally retarded children in the public schools of Cullman, Alabama, from the acts and actions of the defendants [naming other defendants]."

By another amendment, the plaintiffs sought injunctive relief by requiring the promulgation of "rules and regulations designed to insure the protection from physical and mental abuse of the mentally retarded students in the City Schools of Cullman, Alabama," and other relief.

The defendants in question moved for judgment on the pleadings. After a hearing and due consideration, the trial court entered an order, which we quote in part:

"The allegations against Ed Allen, as the City Superintendent of Education, are listed in the amended complaint in paragraphs 32, 34, 33, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, and 26, alleging at all times that he negligently failed or refused to act on the information to protect the mentally retarded plaintiffs from abuse.

"The allegations against the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Barnes v. Dale
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 24, 1988
    ...v. Tannehill Furnace & Foundry Com'n, 443 So.2d 1213 (Ala.1983).9 See, also, Donahoo v. State, 479 So.2d 1188 (Ala.1985), and Hill v. Allen, 495 So.2d 32 (Ala.1986), for further treatment of the issue of immunity. Donahoo held that state officials responsible for release and supervision of ......
  • Does v. Covington County School Bd.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama
    • February 4, 1997
    ...negligence or wantonness, it will not protect the individual from liability if there is evidence of fraud or bad faith. Hill v. Allen, 495 So.2d 32, 34-35 (Ala.1986). For this reason, the Court will address plaintiffs' first four state causes of action separately from their fifth claim, the......
  • L.N. v. Monroe Cnty. Bd. of Educ.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • July 12, 2013
    ...and wantonness claims. See L.S.B. v. Howard, 659 So. 2d 43 (Ala. 1995); C.B. v. Bobo, 659 So. 2d 98 (Ala. 1995); and Hill v. Allen, 495 So. 2d 32 (Ala. 1986)."CONCLUSION AND ORDER"In accordance with the foregoing, the summary judgment motion of defendants Monroe County Board of Education, L......
  • Louviere v. Mobile County Bd. of Educ.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • November 17, 1995
    ...the trial court correctly entered the summary judgment for the Board and its members on the sovereign immunity claim. See Hill v. Allen, 495 So.2d 32 (Ala.1986); Hutt v. Etowah County Board of Education, 454 So.2d 973, 974 (Ala.1984); Clark v. Jefferson County Board of Education, 410 So.2d ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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