Porto v. Town of Tewksbury

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that plaintiff did not prove deliberate indifference when defendant teacher allowed a disabled student to go to the bathroom unsupervised because he did not know there was a high degree of risk that sexual harassment would occur
• stating that a school may be found deliberately indifferent “where it had notice of the sexual harassment” and “failed to take additional reasonable measures after it learned that its initial remedies were ineffective”
• examining the Supreme Court’s holding in Davis ex rel. LaShonda D. v. Monroe County Board of Education, 526 U.S. 629 (1999)
• requiring that deliberate indifference not be evaluated by hindsight
• examining the Supreme Court's holding in Davis ex rel. LaShonda D. v. Monroe County Board of Education , 526 U.S. 629 , 119 S.Ct. 1661 , 143 L.Ed.2d 839 (1999)
• “[A] claim that the school system could or should have done more is insufficient to establish deliberate indifference.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).