Elementary classroom teachers' knowledge of tort liability for negligence

The purpose of this research study was to investigate the legal knowledge of Florida's public elementary classroom teachers in the area of tort liability for negligence. A second purpose of the study was to assess the knowledge of school law in the area of negligence according to specific variables to determine if significant differences in knowledge existed among groups of teachers classified by: years of teaching experience, whether or not teachers took a school law course or inservice, college degree held and whether or not teachers had administrative experience. A validated survey instrument consisting of 22 scenarios based on decided court cases in the United States was utilized. These cases included court decisions ranging from 1938–1994, and represented the categories of duty and standard of care, proper instruction, proper supervision, proper maintenance, field trips, and post-injury treatment. ^ A random sample of 420 elementary classroom teachers were sent the survey instrument to complete, and a total of 309 surveys were returned producing a return rate of 77%. The results of this research study revealed that the overall level of legal knowledge of public elementary classroom teachers in the State of Florida produced a mean percent correct of 53%. The range of scores varied from 18%–82%, with the approximate average of correct answers of 12 out of 22. The category of proper instruction produced the lowest mean percent correct of 35%, and the area of post-injury treatment yielded the highest mean percent correct of 78%. ^ The findings of this study emphasize the necessity of preparing teachers regarding their legal rights, duties and responsibilities. The need for teachers to receive training at the preservice and inservice levels has become clear by this study. ^

An assessment of legal knowledge of preservice teachers completing accredited teacher education programs in South Florida

The purpose of the study was to assess the legal knowledge of preservice teachers completing their educational training at accredited South Florida universities. The population consisted of 372 preservice kindergarten through twelfth grade teachers completing their educational training in any area of public school education.^ The researcher selected areas of school law to assess based on nationwide studies of litigation involving teachers and school boards, the areas most pertinent to the teachers' daily activities and responsibilities. A forty-item instrument was developed and administered to preservice teachers at six South Florida public and private universities. The areas of school law surveyed were tort liability, teachers' rights as instructors and employees, and students' rights. The research questions asked if preservice teachers possess a fundamental knowledge of school law in any of the identified areas and if a significant difference of legal knowledge existed when comparing preservice teachers by university and comparing preservice elementary and preservice secondary teachers. The criteria for a fundamental knowledge of school law was established as scoring 80% or above on the total survey or any area of school law.^ Conclusions. (1) On the overall survey, the preservice teachers did not exhibit a fundamental knowledge of school law. The mean score was 64.2%, with 11.6% of the respondents scoring at or above the 80% level. (2) The preservice teachers did not possess a fundamental knowledge of school law in any of the three areas of school law, though the survey revealed a difference in the preservice teachers' knowledge in the specific areas. The scores were tort liability, 71.9%; teachers' rights, 65%; and students' rights, 52.3%. (3) A significant difference did not exist between elementary and secondary preservice teachers' knowledge of school law. (4) A significant difference did not exist among the preservice teachers' knowledge of school law when compared by university.^ The study suggested a need for increased instruction in these areas of school law to preservice teachers prior to the beginning of their teaching careers. ^

The acceptability and utility of voir dire questionnaires in Florida Circuit Civil Court

This study examined the acceptability and utility of the content of an extensive automobile tort voir dire questionnaire in Florida Circuit Civil Court. The ultimate purpose was to find questionnaire items from established measures that have demonstrated utility in uncovering biases that were at the same time not objectionable to the courts. The survey instrument included a venireperson questionnaire that used case-specific attitudinal and personality measures as well as typical information asked about personal history. The venireperson questionnaire incorporated measures that have proven reliable in other personal injury studies (Hans, & Lofquist, 1994). In order to examine judges' ratings, the questionnaire items were grouped into eight categories. Claims Consciousness scale measures general attitudes towards making claims based on one's legal rights. Belief in a Just World measures how sympathetic the juror would be to people who have suffered injuries. Political Efficacy is another general attitude scale that identifies attitudes towards the government. Litigation Crisis scales elicits attitudes about civil litigation. Case Specific Beliefs about Automobile Accidents and Litigation were taken from questionnaires developed and used in auto torts and other personal injury cases. Juror's personal history was divided into Demographics and Trial Relevant Attitudes. Ninety-seven circuit civil judges critiqued the questionnaire for acceptability, relevance to the type of case presented, and usefulness to attorneys for determining peremptories. ^ The majority of judges' responses confirmed that the central dimension in judicial thinking is juror qualification rather than juror partiality. Only three of the eight voir dire categories were considered relevant by more than 50 percent of the judges: Trial Relevant Experiences, Juror Demographics, and Tort Reform. Additionally, several acceptable items from generally disapproved categories were identified among the responses. These were general and case specific attitudinal items that are related to tort reform. We discuss the utility of voir dire items for discerning juror partiality. ^

Manager's Perceptions of Alcohol Server Staffing and Training Methods

Over-consumption of alcoholic beverages is a concern of managers of hotels and motels with a club/lounge, restaurant, and tavern. The authors surveyed members of two industry associations in Oklahoma to ascertain alcohol server training methods and managers' perception of the value of such programs.

Alcohol Server Liability Law Suits Result From Dram Shop Statutes

The country is experiencing a trend of alcohol server liability law suits resulting from dram shop statutes and common law liability, relatively recent developments in the field of tort law. The author, an expert on liquor liability law, explores the meaning of this trend for the hospitality industry.

Fixed Site Amusement Rides: Who Regulates Safety?

There is currently no national regulation of fixed site (ex. roller coaster) amusement ride safety. The current regulatory system is highly fragmented and consists of many disparate efforts by State and local agencies, judicial intervention in the form of tort litigation and industry self regulatory compliance. The Federal government has no authority over fixed site ride safety. The authors review the state of fixed site ride regulation and the merits of both centralized and de-centralized regulation, including a proposed Federal statute conferring jurisdiction of the matter upon the Consumer Products Safety Commission. They conclude with proposals for enhancing the management of fixed site ride safety.

Attitudinal predictors in a Negligence Case

This study addresses the use of attitude and personality variables as predictors of compensation and award in a personal injury suit. Safety seeking behavior and attitudes toward tort reform are introduced as case-specific factors that may predict this verdict decision. Two hundred registered voters were surveyed on scales measuring attitudes toward safety, tort reform, and psychiatrists. Subjects also indicated their demographic characteristics and the degree of compensation and amount of award they would render the plaintiff in a civil suit. Results indicated attitudinal variables were more predictive of compensation and award than were demographic variables. The implications of these findings are discussed.