Duty of student to comply with rules
- policies on discipline, suspension, expulsion, threats of violence or harm, firearms and physical force
- student handbook or code of conduct
- enforcement of policies
Source:
Section 339.250 — Duty of student to comply with rules; policies on discipline, suspension, expulsion, threats of violence or harm, firearms and physical force; student handbook or code of conduct; enforcement of policies, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors339.html
.
Notes of Decisions
Defendants did not establish that promulgation and enforcement of hair length rule was within the authority of the school board under this section. Neuhaus v. Federico, 12 Or App 314, 505 P2d 939 (1973), Sup Ct review denied
A school board’s authority to enact rules governing student conduct is limited to enacting rules that have some reasonable connection with the educational process. Neuhaus v. Federico, 12 Or App 314, 505 P2d 939 (1973), Sup Ct review denied
This section does not modify the common law rule that a teacher is immune from liability for physical punishment, reasonable in degree, administered to a pupil. Simms v. Sch. Dist. 1, Multnomah County, 13 Or App 119, 508 P2d 236 (1973), Sup Ct review denied
Rules of student conduct adopted by district school board need not list every possible disciplinary action that may follow infraction. Ferguson v. Phoenix-Talent School District No. 4, 172 Or App 389, 19 P3d 943 (2001), Sup Ct review denied
“Refractory” means resisting control or authority. Ferguson v. Phoenix-Talent School District No. 4, 172 Or App 389, 19 P3d 943 (2001), Sup Ct review denied
School board’s authority to discipline students indicates that board is final policy maker for school district. G.C. v. North Clackamas School District, 654 F. Supp. 2d 1226 (D. Or. 2009)
Law Review Citations
38 WLR 657 (2002)