Costello v. Mitchell Public School District 79
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
266 F.3d 916 (2001)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
Sadonya Costello (plaintiff) was a seventh-grade student at Mitchell High School. Sadonya was a new student to the school and was struggling academically. Sadonya’s band teacher, Roger Kercher (defendant) called Sadonya “stupid,” “retarded,” and “dumb” in front of her classmates; once threw a notebook at Sadonya; and told Sadonya she could not play in the band because she was too stupid. Sadonya’s mother arranged a meeting attended by Sadonya’s therapist. Kercher angrily walked out of the meeting. Sadonya was taken out of band class and placed in a music appreciation class also taught by Kercher. Sadonya eventually left Mitchell High School and was homeschooled. Sadonya suffered from depression and received psychological treatment. Sadonya and her parents (the Costellos) (plaintiffs) brought, among other causes of action, a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress against Mitchell Public School District 79, the school board and superintendent of Mitchell Public School, the Mitchell High School principal, and Kercher (collectively, the school) (defendants). The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the school.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wollman, C.J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Hamilton, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.