Thursday, December 3, 2015

Hegel v. Langsam case brief summary

Hegel v. Langsam case brief
Facts: A 17 year old female student from University became associated with criminals, was seduced, became a drug user and was absent from dormitory and didn’t return to parents. Parents want to hold the university responsible for all of that. Tried to use O.R.C. 3345.21 requiring a university to maintain law and order on campus and O.R.C. 2151. 41 making it a crime to contribute to delinquency of child. 
Decision: Defendant wins
Reasoning: The statutes have no bearing on the fact situation. (Probably because she did her activity off campus and university didn’t do anything to contribute to delinquency.) Then they said that a university is not required to babysit or nurse the students. It is a place that students attend voluntarily and as long as they follow the rules and are permitted to attend then there is no problem. No one is required to regulate private lives of students. 

Holding: A defendant is not required to regulate the private life of the plaintiff nor to supervise their associations, the cost of that would be too high. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.