Court Opinion

ID: 9853200
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 05:44:17.831036+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:42.623254
License: Public Domain

Cureton, Judge
(dissenting):
I dissent for the reason I think the recent case of Hollins v. Richland County, — S.C. —, 427 S.E. (2d) 654 (1993), mandates a reversal of the grant of summary judgment.
In Hollins, the mother of an eleven-year-old student brought suit against the School District after her daughter was killed attempting to cross a highway while walking home from school. The child had been suspended from riding the school bus for five (5) days, but the mother had not received notice of the suspension because the daughter did not deliver to her the school’s note. The court stated that whether the School District exercised slight care in sending a note home with an eleven year old was a question for the jury. Under proper instructions, the court stated, it was for the jury to determine whether the School District’s failure to ensure the mother received actual notice of the bus suspension constituted gross negligence.
I would hold that whether the School District was guilty of gross negligence in preventing the second attack upon Clyburn was a matter for the jury. The District’s Director of Transportation was well aware of the trouble between these individuals and could have taken legal action against Clyburn’s assailant for boarding the bus four days prior to the second attack. The driver admitted that she knew the assailant, was aware of the danger, and was keeping a lookout for the assailant to prevent her from causing trouble after the first incident. Despite this, the assailant was able to board the bus and attack Clyburn with a knife. Additionally, as in Hollins, I think that whether, under the circumstances of this case, the School District exercised even slight care in failing to notify Clyburn’s parents of the attack for some four days, was a question of fact for the jury. Presumably, Clyburn’s *528parents would have arranged for alternate transportation to school or taken steps to protect their daughter.
Viewing the evidence and the conclusions to be drawn therefrom most favorably for Clyburn, I would hold that either a genuine issue of fact exists, or an inquiry into, the facts is desirable to clarify application of the law.