Student Discrimination and Harassment – Hate Crime

Useful Rulings on Student Discrimination and Harassment – Hate Crime

Recent Rulings on Student Discrimination and Harassment – Hate Crime

A F VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL

(Donovan v. Poway Unified School Dist. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 567, 579, [italics added].) “The elements ‘severe and pervasive’ harassment, ‘actual notice’ and ‘deliberate indifference,’ which govern an equal protection claim, are the same elements that apply to establish a claim for money damages under Title IX [Citations] and section 220.” (Id. at pp.608–609.) Defendant Kamiya contends that there is no evidence that she engaged in severe and pervasive discriminatory conduct.

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

FAIR EDUCATION SANTA BARBARA, INC., ET AL. V. SANTA BARBARA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL.

” ● On October 3, 2018, plaintiff’s counsel sent a further letter to SBUSD’s counsel describing how SBUSD and JCCC had violated numerous anti-discrimination statutes, including Education Code Section 220, but there was no response. (Scott Dec., ¶¶ 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, Exs. A, B, C, D.) Nowhere in this correspondence did SBUSD’s attorneys advise FESB of its need to pursue additional administrative remedies or that it could appeal SBUSD’s conclusion to the CDE.

  • Hearing

    Jan 14, 2020

ASHLEY FOWLER VS CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES, ET AL.

Sixth Cause of Action Plaintiff alleges that GCCD violated Education Code section 220, a provision of the Sex Equity in Education Act, by failing to take appropriate steps to prevent Hayne’s sexual harassment. (FAC ¶¶ 70-71.)

  • Hearing

    Jan 06, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

M.F. VS. CLAYTON VALLEY CHARTER

(Donovan v. Poway Unified School Dist. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 567, 579 (upholding jury verdict against school district for failing to take appropriate action after plaintiffs complained of being called “faggot” and “dyke” by other students throughout their time in high school and were subjected to threats of violence).

  • Hearing

    Dec 06, 2019

FAIR EDUCATION SANTA BARBARA, INC., ET AL. V. SANTA BARBARA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL.

The plaintiffs asserted claims against the district under Education Code section 220, title 42 United States Code section 1983, and Civil Code sections 51 and 52 (Unruh Act.) (Id. at p. 584.) With respect to the section 220 claim, the plaintiffs alleged that the district did not have an adequate or effective policy to ensure that the high school was safe for gay or lesbian students. (Ibid.)

  • Hearing

    Oct 29, 2019

DOE VS CORONA-NORCO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

However, the Court of Appeal applied Education Code section 220 to harassment in Donovan v. Poway Unified School Dist. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 567 (Donovan). Defendant argues that Plaintiff has not alleged that, because of her gender, Plaintiff suffered severe, pervasive, and offensive harassment that effectively deprived her of equal access to educational benefits and opportunities within the meaning of Donovan. Plaintiff alleges harassment based on her gender.

  • Hearing

    Sep 30, 2019

A G VS COVINA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL

(Educ. Code § 220; Donovan v. Poway Unif. Sch. Dist. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 567, 579.). Defendants have attempted to meet their burden under section § 437c by presenting facts showing that the school did not have knowledge of the harassment, nor did it participate in discriminating against Plaintiff. Plaintiff only informed Defendant Burciaga of being teased after the police were notified. (DSS 14, 24, 38, 47.)

  • Hearing

    Jun 14, 2019

J.O. DOE, ET AL VS ANTELOPE VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRIC

On May 08, 2019, AVUHSD brought the instant motion for judgment on the pleadings as to Plaintiff’s Second Cause of Action for Sexual Harassment and Retaliation (Edu. Code § 220 et seq.). AVUHSD argues that Plaintiff may not recover on this cause of action since he failed to comply with claim presentation requirements pursuant to Gov. Code §§ 900, 901, 910, 911.2, 911.4, 945.4, and 945.6. 5. Plaintiff filed opposition on May 31, 2019. AVUHSD replied on June 06, 2019. 6.

  • Hearing

    Jun 13, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JOHN RD DOE ET AL VS HAYNES FAMILY OF PROGRAMS INC ET AL

(Educ. Code 220.) Paragraph 193 alleges that plaintiff John Doe was harmed by being subjected to harassment because of his gender. Paragraph 156 alleges that defendant knew that co-defendant Ramirez befriended and began grooming plaintiff John Doe on defendant’s van and on campus, and at least one of defendant’s employee had noticed such behavior before and during the ongoing sexual harassment. Paragraph 196-201 allege plaintiff John Doe’s injury. The demurrer is OVERRULED.

  • Hearing

    Mar 06, 2019

MARLENE GARCIA ET AL VS ROBERT J OWIECKI ET AL

.); and (11) violation of Education Code Section 220. Plaintiffs move, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 2025.480, to compel the oral depositions of the following employees of Defendant Whittier City School District: Antonia Ruiz, Beatriz Mora, Cassondra Mojica, Frances Stearns, Jeff Rivo, Raquel Gasporra, Raul Lopez, Raymond Louis Espinoza, Rebecca Meza, Ruby Soto, and Wendy Nelson.

  • Hearing

    Feb 20, 2019

MEENA ZAREH M D VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

(Donovan v. Poway Unified School Dist. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 567, 579, 587 (Donovan).)[4] The “deliberate indifference” standard is the same standard applied for federal Title IX claims. (Donovan, 167 Cal.App.4th at pp. 605-606 [concluding the Legislature intended to apply Title IX standards of liability to apply to a section 220 claim for money damages].)

  • Hearing

    Jan 31, 2019

E F ET AL VS LONG BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

(Donovan v. Poway Unified School Dist. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 567, 579.) LBUSD argues the evidence reflects that it was not aware of “severe, pervasive and offensive” harassment.” The issue is improperly framed as “Plaintiff cannot meet her burden” of demonstrating this element. On summary judgment the issue is not whether Plaintiff can establish an element until the moving burden of negating the element has been met.

  • Hearing

    Nov 27, 2018

JOHN RD DOE ET AL VS HAYNES FAMILY OF PROGRAMS INC ET AL

Donovan v. Poway Unified School Dist. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 567, 579. Haynes argues that this cause of action fails, because the criminal complaint reflects that the incidents occurred in San Bernardino County, where plaintiffs reside, and that, as such, none of the alleged sexual misconduct could have occurred on its campus. This is a factual issue inappropriate for resolution at demurrer.

  • Hearing

    Oct 22, 2018

JOHN RD DOE ET AL VS HAYNES FAMILY OF PROGRAMS INC ET AL

Donovan v. Poway Unified School Dist. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 567, 579. Here, however, there are no factual allegations that demonstrate that the District had actual knowledge of Ramirez’s alleged sexual misconduct; as such, District’s demurrer to the tenth cause of action is sustained.

  • Hearing

    Oct 15, 2018

TARON MALKHASHYAN VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET

Education Code section 220 prohibits discrimination on the basis of a number of characteristics such as disability, gender, and sexual orientation. The SAC in no way alleges that plaintiff was discriminated against on any of these characteristics. Education Code section 44807 states that “[e]very teacher in the public schools shall hold pupils to a strict account for their conduct on the way to and from school, on the playgrounds, or during recess.” This does not apply to the robotics competition.

  • Hearing

    May 17, 2018

DE MAGALHAES VS REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

In her opposition, plaintiff contends the count is premised on Labor Code section 1102.5, the FEHA, and Education Code section 220. These statutes are not identified in count 4. As for Labor Code section 1102.5, it protects employees who disclose reasonably based suspicions of illegal activity to a government or law enforcement agency. See Green v Ralee Engineering Co. (1988) 19 Cal.4th 66, 77.

  • Hearing

    May 02, 2018

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

A G VS COVINA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL

Instead, Plaintiffs focus on only three statutes: Educ. Code 220, 234, and 234.1. (Opposition, 5:26-6:8.) Educ.

  • Hearing

    Feb 05, 2018

DOE VS SAN DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

The analysis would be the same under Education Code section 220 (Eighth Cause of Action). Under that section, Plaintiff must produce evidence that ( 1) he suffered severe or pervasive harassment that denied him equal access to education; (2) the District had actual knowledge of Sutton's harassment; and (3) the District's response to knowledge of the harassment "was clearly unreasonable in light of all the known circumstances." See CACI Jury Instruction No. 3069; Videckis v.

  • Hearing

    Jan 24, 2018

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JANE CJD DOE ET AL VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET

For all these reasons, the demurrer is OVERRULED as to this COA. 6th COA: Educ. Code § 220 Educ. Code § 220 states in relevant part, “[n]o person shall be subjected to discrimination on the basis of…gender…in any program or activity conducted by an educational institution that receives, or benefits from, state financial assistance or enrolls pupils who receive state student financial aid.”

  • Hearing

    Nov 09, 2017

JOSIAH S. VS. PITTSBURG U.S.D.

However, Education Code Section 220 prohibits discrimination based on disability, gender, gender identity, gender expression, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or any other characteristic contained in the definition of hate crimes in Penal Code Section 422.55 in any program or activity conducted by an educational institution that receives, or benefits from, state financial assistance or enrolls pupils who receive state student financial aid. This appears to be a mandatory duty.

  • Hearing

    Apr 12, 2017

1

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.