C.N. v. Ridgewood Board of Education
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
430 F.3d 159 (2005)
- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
School officials in the Ridgewood Board of Education (the district) (defendant) administered a survey to students in the seventh through twelfth grades. The survey discussed very sensitive topics such as suicide, drug use, alcohol use, and sexual activity. Parent organizations voiced concerns about the survey and requested information on how to opt students out of the survey. The information provided to parents did not discuss the ability to opt out of the survey. The survey was administered during the school day, and a period was provided for any students who were not in attendance on the day the survey was given to take the survey later. The District reported 100 percent participation. The survey did not contain any identifying information. There was no space for student names, addresses, or identification numbers. The form instructed the students that the survey would be confidential and directed the students to not put a name on the form. Three students and their parents (plaintiffs) sued the district, alleging a violation of the constitutional right to privacy. The trial court granted summary judgment to the district. The plaintiffs appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fisher, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.