California Court of Appeal

In a minor plaintiff's suit, through a guardian ad litem, against his high school, the school district, and an individual guidance counselor, claiming various causes of action arising from allegations that the counselor sexually harassed, abused and molested the plaintiff, trial court's judgment sustaining the school district's demurrer to the complaint on its behalf and on behalf of the school is affirmed where: 1) the facts alleged in the complaint do not support the vicarious liability of the school district; 2) no statute allows a direct action for negligence against the school district; 3) no mandatory duty subjects the school district to liability; 4) the plaintiff's other causes of action also fail to state a claim; and 5) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend as plaintiff does not indicate how he could amend the complaint to state viable causes of action and thus, has failed to carry his burden to show a reasonable probability that he could cure the complaint's defect by amendment.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/05/2010
• Published 11/05/2010

Judges

• JOHNSON

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• John C. Manly, Stephen M. Harber