Morris v. Orleans Parish School Bd.

Decision Date11 December 1989
Docket NumberNo. 89-C-1319,89-C-1319
CitationMorris v. Orleans Parish School Bd., 553 So.2d 427 (La. 1989)
PartiesSidney MORRIS, Individually and on behalf of the Minor, Sakinah Morris v. ORLEANS PARISH SCHOOL BOARD. 553 So.2d 427, 57 Ed. Law Rep. 1087
CourtLouisiana Supreme Court

Robert L. Rieger, Jr. and George M. Pierson, Baton Rouge, for applicant.

Janet Boles, Boles, Boles & Ryan, Baton Rouge, for appellee.

MARCUS, Justice.

On February 14, 1986, Sakinah Morris, a 12-year-old student at the Agnes Bauduit Elementary School in New Orleans, was running to a water fountain in the school yard during recess when she slipped on wet asphalt underneath the fountain.She fell on her right hip.Although she had never suffered hip problems before, she felt pain in her hip shortly after the fall.Two days later, her father brought her to Charity Hospital where a doctor diagnosed muscle strain and sent her home.She returned to the hospital after two more days of increasing pain.She then had a fever and limitation of motion in her hip.Drs. Charles Murphy and David Neirschwander diagnosed an infection in her right hip joint.They operated to drain the joint and remove the infected substance.Her wound was left open for two weeks and she was kept in traction for about three weeks after the operation.She developed a rash while she was in the hospital, but overall had a good recovery.On March 25, five weeks after the surgery, she was discharged from the hospital on crutches.About two weeks later, she got off the crutches and went back to school.However, she failed school that year.She actively plays sports despite pain in her hip when she runs.She has a four-to-five inch scar on her hip from the surgery.

On August 1, 1985, over six months prior to Sakinah's fall, the Orleans Parish School Board received a request to repair worn gaskets which were leaking water from the water fountain where Sakinah slipped.On December 6, 1985, more than two months before the fall, the school board recorded a second request regarding the same water fountain which "keeps running."This request came from a concerned parent and the school board entitled it a "Request for Emergency Repairs."Additionally, the head custodian at the Agnes Bauduit School was aware for three months before Sakinah's fall that this fountain was continuously stopped up and dripping.He attempted to repair it with a plunger.When that did not work, he turned the water off from a valve underneath the fountain.However, he found that the fountain still leaked when it rained.Cracks in the asphalt prevented the leaking water from flowing off freely.Therefore, on or about November 18, 1985, almost three months before the fall, he called the school board to say that he was sending a requisition for repairs via the principal's office.For safety reasons, he considered such a requisition to be an emergency request.Despite these requests, the school board did not work on the fountain until April 14-18, 1986, about two months after Sakinah fell.

Mr. Morris, individually and on behalf of his daughter, Sakinah, brought suit against the Orleans Parish School Board to recover damages for the negligence of the school board in causing the accident.The school board answered generally denying the allegations of plaintiff's petition.The State Department of Health and Human Resources intervened to recover medical expenses in the amount of $8,537.70.At trial, it was stipulated by the parties that in the event of a favorable judgment for plaintiff, the intervention in that amount would be recognized as part of the judgment.The trial judge rendered judgment in favor of Mr. Morris on behalf of his daughter, Sakinah, in the amount of $40,000 and individually for $8,538.70 for medical expenses due Charity Hospital and against the Orleans Parish School Board.Because the judge found Sakinah ten percent comparatively negligent, he reduced the awards by ten percent.The school board appealed.The court of appeal reversed, finding that plaintiff failed to prove that Sakinah's fall caused the infection in her hip joint.Whether the school board was negligent was pretermitted.1Upon plaintiff's application, we granted certiorari to review the correctness of that decision.2

The issues presented for our determination are (1) whether the school board was negligent; (2) if so, whether Sakinah's fall caused the infection in her hip joint; and (3) if so, whether the damages awarded by the trial judge were proper.

The standard of conduct required of persons in Louisiana in their relationships with one another as a basis of delictual liability is set forth in La.Civ.Code arts. 2315 and 2316.

Article 2315 provides in pertinent part:

Every act whatever of man that causes damage to another obliges him by whose fault it happened to repair it.

Article 2316 provides:

Every person is responsible for the damage he occasions not merely by his act, but by his negligence, his imprudence, or his want of skill.

Accordingly, under these articles the elements of a cause of action are fault, causation, and damage.The conduct of which the plaintiff complains must be a cause-in-fact of the harm.After determining causation, the court must also determine what was the duty imposed on defendant, and whether the risk which caused the accident was within the scope of the duty.A breach of a duty on the part of the defendant which was imposed to protect against the risk involved makes the offender negligent under the above articles.St. Hill v. Tabor, 542 So.2d 499(La.1989).

In the instant case, Sakinah testified that there was a "lot of water" underneath the water fountain where she slipped and fell.She fell during recess after having lunch and running out to the school yard.Thus, her fall occurred at a time and place in which students are likely to run and could easily slip on wet asphalt.Under the circumstances, we find that the school board's conduct in allowing these conditions to exist constituted a contributing cause of Sakinah's fall."Defendant's conduct need not be the sole cause of the harm but it must be a necessary antecedent.Stated another way, if plaintiff can show he probably would not have suffered damages, absent defendant's conduct, he has carried his burden of proving cause in fact."Gibson v. Faubion Truck Lines, Inc., 427 So.2d 68, 71(La.App. 4th Cir.1983).Accordingly, we find that the school board's conduct was a cause-in-fact of the fall.

Next, we consider the extent of the school board's duty to its students."A duty, in negligence cases, may be defined as an obligation, to which the law will give recognition and effect, to conform to a particular standard of conduct toward another."Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts (5th ed. 1984)."The standard of care for school teachers and administrators is that of a...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
63 cases
  • Roberts v. Benoit
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • 9 d1 Setembro d1 1991
    ...negligence encompassed the risk that someone would drown. Recent cases have run the gamut from the mundane, Morris v. Orleans Parish School Board, 553 So.2d 427, 429 (La.1989) (duty to keep drinking fountains in repair encompasses the risk that student might slip and fall on the wet asphalt......
  • Doe v. McKesson
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • 25 d5 Março d5 2022
    ...one exists."4 See Lazard, 859 So. 2d at 660, where elements were well defined and analyzed separately. See also Morris v. Orleans Par. Sch. Bd ., 553 So. 2d 427, 429 (La. 1989).5 The certified question expressly contemplates reframing, stating, "Should the Supreme Court of Louisiana accept ......
  • 96-1261 La.App. 3 Cir. 4/9/97, Dauzat v. Canal Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 9 d3 Abril d3 1997
    ...instead were "developmental." Plaintiff has the burden of proving causation by a preponderance of the evidence. Morris v. Orleans Parish School Bd., 553 So.2d 427 (La.1989). The plaintiff is aided in discharging this burden by the legal presumption that, "if before the accident the injured ......
  • 95-669 La.App. 3 Cir. 3/6/96, Rowe v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 6 d3 Março d3 1996
    ...[95-669 La.App. 3 Cir. 3] II. Plaintiff has the burden of proving causation by a preponderance of the evidence. Morris v. Orleans Parish School Bd., 553 So.2d 427 (La.1989). The plaintiff is aided in discharging this burden by the legal presumption that, "if before the accident the injured ......
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles