A recent case reiterated the standard of care required of teachers in NYC schools. In K. L. v. City of New York 2023 NY Slip Op 03914 (2nd Dept. 2023), plaintiff was a minor in a classroom under the instruction and supervision of a First-grade teacher and paraprofessional. At one point, the students were sitting on the floor and asked to stand up to return to their desks. The teacher was walking toward the classroom phone when another child’s foot suddenly extended out and tripped her up, causing her to fall on the plaintiff. The City of New York, Department of Education and the teacher were sued for negligence and then moved for, and were granted, summary judgment at the end of discovery arguing that they could not be found liable for the accident. Plaintiff appealed and the Second Department affirmed the trial court’s decision.
First, the Court reviewed the controlling caselaw on the duty of care owed by the Dept. of Education, and its teachers, to attending children. “Schools are under a duty to adequately supervise the students in their charge and they will be held liable for foreseeable injuries proximately related to the absence of adequate supervision” (J.F. v Brentwood Union Free Sch. Dist., 184 A.D.3d 806, 807). “‘A school has a duty to exercise the same degree of care toward its students as would a reasonably prudent parent'” (Godoy v Central Islip Union Free Sch. Dist., 117 AD3d 901, 901). “However, where an accident occurs in so short a span of time that even the most intense supervision could not have prevented it, [then the] lack of supervision is not [a] proximate cause of the injury and summary judgment in favor of a defendant charged with the duty of reasonable supervision is warranted” (M.P. v Central Islip Union Free Sch. Dist., 174 AD3d 636, 637).
Using the controlling case law, the Court reasoned that the teacher’s action of asking the students to stand up and walk back to their desk while then almost immediately taking a step toward the ringing classroom phone was such an insufficient amount of time, that any stronger supervision could not have prevented the accident. Thus, the teacher’s lack of supervision could not be found as a proximate cause of the injury. This decision shows that while a school and its teachers have a strong duty to protect and reasonably supervise children while they are in school, the duty is not absolute. A reasonable supervision standard is applied wherein if a stricter scrutiny and supervision of the children could not have changed the outcome of the incident, then the lack of adequate supervision cannot be used to support the breach of duty claim.
Thanks to Raymond Gonzalez for his assistance with this article. Should you have any questions, please contact Tom Bracken.