Hector F. v. El Centro Elementary School District
California Court of Appeal
227 Cal. App. 4th 331, 173 Cal. Rptr. 3d 413 (2014)

- Written by Mary Phelan D'Isa, JD
Facts
Hector F. (plaintiff), the father of three children who attended public schools, filed a complaint against the El Centro Elementary School District (the district) (defendant), seeking relief on behalf of himself and his son Brian by way of mandate to force the district to enforce state education laws implementing the right of public school students to be free from discrimination and harassment and requiring each school district to develop comprehensive school-safety plans for each of its schools. Brian had been diagnosed with emotional disabilities after being bullied at elementary and middle schools in the district. Hector alleged that the district had neither adopted nor implemented comprehensive safety plans for its schools. The district demurred and alleged that Hector lacked standing to seek relief on his own behalf because Brian no longer attended any school in the district and Hector had not alleged that either of his other children had been subjected to discrimination or harassment at any school in the district. The trial court sustained the demurrer, and Hector appealed and argued that as a citizen and taxpayer, he had standing to seek enforcement of the laws because the public interest in maintaining a system of taxpayer-funded public schools that are free of the destructive influences of discrimination, harassment, and bullying.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Benke, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 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.