Smith v. McDowell

A school receptionist's actions in failing to consult a 6-year-old child's information card, after receiving an apparently fraudulent call and fax instructing her to release the child to her non-custodial father, and the receptionist's failure to consult an administrator violated absolute and ministerial duties.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In this appeal, we revisit the issue of official immunity with respect to school employees. K. L., the six-year-old daughter of appellant Antuan Smith, was abducted from Cook County Primary School by her noncustodial father. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the school principal and the school receptionist, Stacey McDowell, concluding that these defendants were immune from liability under the doctrine of official immunity because they were performing discretionary functions at the time of the incident. Smith appeals only the grant of summary judgment to McDowell. Because McDowell’s acts were entirely ministerial and therefore not within the scope of official immunity, we reverse. Construed in favor of the nonmovant, Reece v. Turner , 284 Ga. App. 282, 283 643 SE2d 814 2007, the evidence shows that Smith enrolled K. L. in Cook County Primary School in August 2005. Smith told the school secretary, who is not a party to this appeal, that Smith’s estranged husband, Sidney Ledgester, had abducted the child in the past and should not have any contact with her. The secretary did not place a warning to this effect on the child’s registration form or enter it into the school’s computer system. The registration form states, however, that the only persons authorized to check the child out of school, other than Smith, are K. L.’s grandmother and aunt.

As the school receptionist, McDowell was responsible for checking children out of school. Before releasing any student to anyone other than a parent that she knew, McDowell was supposed to check the child’s registration form, also called a student information card, to verify that the person picking up the child was authorized to do so. McDowell repeatedly and positively testified that she had no discretion with regard to this procedure; she was required to check the card, and she was required to consult an administrator if the card did not list the person seeking to check out the child, even if she received a note or a fax.

Smith v. McDowell

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report