Illinois Appeals Court Finds School District Immune From Bullying Lawsuit


The Second District Illinois Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion in a case involving a school district’s alleged response to student-on-student bullying. The court in Malinski v. Grayslake Community High School District 127 dismissed the lawsuit against the school district, finding that school officials’ responses to complaints of bullying by a student were discretionary policy decisions for which the school district was immune.

In Malinski, a high school student alleged that school officials repeatedly turned a blind eye to physical and verbal abuse and bullying that he suffered during school hours and on school property. The student alleged that the school district breached a “duty to provide a safe environment” by willfully, wantonly, and with reckless disregard for his safety ignoring the warnings of bullying and allowing the abuse to continue. The school district moved to dismiss the lawsuit based on the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act, which immunizes discretionary policy decisions of school officials from liability. The student responded that the school district’s duty to carry out the bullying policy it had implemented under the Illinois School Code was a ministerial act not protected by immunity.

Relying on prior Illinois bullying cases discussing the Tort Immunity Act, the court held that on the facts alleged, the school district’s decision was a discretionary policy decision immune from liability. The court first made clear that the mere fact that the School Code requires school districts to implement a bullying policy does not necessarily mean that the carrying out of that policy is a ministerial act. Rather, the policy can leave significant discretion to school officials on issues such as whether bullying has occurred, what consequences will result, and appropriate remedial actions. The court then held that because the plaintiff had failed to attach a copy of the bullying policy at issue, it could not determine whether the particular policy at issue in the case required a specific response to the bullying that was alleged, thus potentially making the actions in carrying out the policy ministerial.

The court’s decision does not set forth any new law on this issue, but is an important reminder that allowing flexibility to school officials in bullying policies may provide certain protections to the school district in the face of a state law bullying claim. Notably, the case did not address other types of liability that school districts may face when addressing bullying complaints, such as liability under federal laws and agency regulations. School officials should thus continue to reasonably address and respond to all allegations of bullying that are received.

Written by:

Published In:

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Franczek Radelet P.C. | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.