Fresquez v. Sacramento Unified School Dist.

Filed 3/28/06 Fresquez v. Sacramento Unified School Dist. CA3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento)

----

Senior high school student Ceasar Calderon beat up fellow student Daniel Fresquez on school grounds while Fresquez was waiting for his gym teacher to show up to take roll after the commencement of his physical education (PE) class. At the time of the attack, the gym teacher, Donald Pierce, was inside monitoring the locker room ensuring it was secure.

Fresquez sued the Sacramento Unified School District (school district) and others alleging negligent supervision. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the school district concluding that it provided sufficient supervision and that Fresquez failed to establish a triable issue of fact that the lack of supervision caused his injuries. We shall reverse.

When high school students have reported for class at the appropriate time and place, the law requires the school district, which has a special relationship with those students, to provide adequate supervision to protect them. Here, there is a triable issue of fact as to whether the school district adequately discharged its duty to supervise Fresquez and the members of this class, who were directed to assemble in two places: one that was directly supervised by a teacher, and one that was not. In addition, a triable issue of fact exists as to whether the presence of that supervision would have deterred this assault given that a fight between these two students had been averted by the presence of a monitor shortly before this attack.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In his complaint, Fresquez named the school district, Hiram Johnson High School, and Mary Shelton as defendants.^[1] He alleged that these defendants failed to adequately supervise the students and failed to create, implement, and monitor an adequate security plan for the school. Fresquez also alleged the defendants knew or should have known that there were fights and other assaults on campus and that students would be subject to attack unless the defendants provided reasonable supervision for the students. Despite this knowledge, Fresquez alleged the defendants failed to provide reasonable and adequate supervision and failed to protect him.

The school district filed a general denial and raised a number of affirmative defenses.

With the case thus joined, the school district filed a motion for summary judgment claim that it discharged its obligation to supervise students and that Fresquez could not demonstrate that his injuries were caused by any failure of the school district to provide him with supervision.

In support of this motion, the school district submitted the following claimed undisputed facts:

On June 5, 2002, Hiram Johnson High School had a security team in place that consisted of four campus monitors, five outside security guards, and one uniformed Sacramento Police Officer. Typically, the private security guards began patrolling the campus by 7:30 a.m., the campus monitors began patrolling at 8:00 a.m., and by 8:30 a.m., all of the monitors are on patrol. The security team patrols the school in a mobile fashion as opposed to having stationary positions. Apparently, it was common for the guards to monitor the roll call area for the PE classes every 5 to 10 minutes.

On the morning of June 5, 2002, a fight broke out in the campus quad area and a radio call went out to all monitors and security personnel. The fight started at about 8:15 or 8:20 a.m. Seven of the security personnel responded to the fight in the quad.

Shortly after that, at about 8:35, Fresquez walked to the blacktop numbers outside for roll call for his PE class. There were about 15 to 20 PE students present there.

Fresquez's PE teacher was Donald Pierce. Pierce testified that the first bell rings at 8:20 a.m. and the students are to report to the gym by 8:30 a.m. The students are required to report to their numbers by 8:37 a.m. where roll call is taken. At the time Fresquez reported to the blacktop numbers, Pierce typically supervises the students in the boy's locker room and secures the locker room before reporting to the numbers for roll call.

A few seconds after Fresquez reported to the blacktop, Calderon and 15 to 20 students emerged from the locker room and rushed toward Fresquez. Fresquez backed up and tripped over his backpack and started to fall backwards. As he was falling, Calderon jumped on top of him. Fresquez hit his head on the ground and lost consciousness. Undeterred, Calderon hit Fresquez five or six times in the head before he and his friends left. According to the district, the entire event began and ended in a few minutes. Fresquez had never complained to any school employee or other adult about Calderon prior to this fight.

At 8:40 a.m., adults had responded to the fight between Calderon and Fresquez.

In response to this separate statement, Fresquez added the following facts. The morning of the fight in which Fresquez was injured, Calderon told him on campus that he was going to fight him.

In response to the school district's contention that security guards and monitors were in place starting at 7:30 a.m., Fresquez pointed out that between 8:30 and 8:40 a.m., no one was supervising the area where Calderon attacked Fresquez. Fresquez also presented evidence that Calderon and his band of 20 or more attacked another student at a separate location on the campus on the same morning before attacking Fresquez. There were no school district personnel monitoring that area at the time of that attack either.

The principal of the school testified that the area where Fresquez was injured should have been within the sight of his security team. The principal also testified that a teacher should have been supervising the children at 8:30 a.m. when the students assembled. Despite this, in the ensuing investigation, the principal was unable to find anyone who was present at the time Calderon attacked Fresquez. Fresquez's PE teacher, Pierce, testified he typically got to the blacktop roll call numbers at 8:37 a.m. and sometimes later.

The security officers assigned to this area had confusion of their own as to who was in charge of supervising this area. The principal stated that Lyons Security was to provide a security guard to supervise this area. His vice-principal, Laura Romero, testified she assigned campus monitor Joe Gilbert to supervise the area. Gilbert testified he believed a Lyons Security guard was assigned to supervise this area. The head of Lyons Security testified he believed Gilbert was to supervise this area. Further, the school had no backup plans if a security person left his or her post.

Finally, Fresquez presented evidence that Calderon had attempted to fight with Fresquez two weeks before this attack and that a school security guard was present and halted the altercation.

In its rebuttal, the school district presented testimony that Fresquez believed the prior incident with Calderon was isolated and was going to â€