Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
Nabozny v. Podlesny
95-3634 (7th Cir. filed Feb. 5, 1996) ; Clearinghouse Number: 51116
Description
Student Challenges School Officials' Failure to Protect Him from Sexual-Orientation Harassment by Other Students
Abstract
Appellant student has requested the Seventh Circuit to reverse the
district court's dismissal of his sexual harassment claim.
Alleging that he was physically assaulted and verbally harassed by
other students for his homosexuality, appellant claimed that
appellee school officials violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights
by not protecting him from harassment. The district court held that
without a special relationship between appellant and school
officials they had no affirmative duty to protect him from private
violence; school officials were not liable for any custom, policy,
or practice of private actors; even if they were, their liability
was not clearly established when their conduct occurred; and they
were entitled to qualified immunity. On appeal, appellant argues
that the district court's grant of summary judgment on the
basis of qualified immunity is subject to de novo review; the
presence of material fact requires reversal; he has a valid equal
protection right not to be denied protection from harm because of
his sexual orientation or gender; reasonable officials should have
known that failing to protect him is unconstitutional; and the
district court erred in finding insufficient evidence that school
officials enhanced his risk of harm and in holding that schools
could escape liability for encouraging students to harm other
students.
Additional Information
Files
- Order and Judgment in a Civil Case
- Appellant's Opening Brief and Appendix
- Brief of Amici Curiae the National Association of School Psychologists, the National Association of Social Workers, Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, and Horizons Community Services
- Brief and Appendix of Defendants-Appellees
- Appellant's Reply Brief
