Iverson v. Muroc Unified School District
32 Cal. App. 4th 218, 38 Cal. Rptr. 2d 35, 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1073 (1995)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Government Code section 831.7, which grants public entities immunity from liability for injuries sustained during a "hazardous recreational activity," does not apply to injuries sustained by a student during a mandatory physical education class conducted during school hours.
Facts:
- Michael Iverson was a 14-year-old student enrolled in an eighth-grade physical education class at a school in the Muroc Unified School District.
- The physical education class was a compulsory part of the school curriculum, conducted during regular school hours.
- During the class, students were participating in a soccer match on a school field.
- Iverson had prior experience playing in organized soccer leagues.
- While playing, another student performed a "slide tackle" on Iverson.
- As a result of the tackle, Iverson suffered a double fracture of his right forearm.
Procedural Posture:
- Michael Iverson, through his guardian ad litem, filed a negligence lawsuit against Muroc Unified School District and its physical education instructor in the superior court (trial court).
- The District filed an answer asserting statutory immunity under Government Code section 831.7.
- The District moved for summary judgment, arguing it was immune from liability as a matter of law.
- The superior court granted the District's motion for summary judgment.
- Iverson (appellant) appealed the summary judgment to the California Court of Appeal, Fifth District.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the governmental immunity for injuries sustained during a "hazardous recreational activity," as provided by California Government Code section 831.7, immunize a school district from liability for injuries sustained by a student during a mandatory physical education class?
Opinions:
Majority - Stone, Acting P. J.
No. Government Code section 831.7 does not immunize a school district from liability for injuries sustained by a student during a mandatory physical education class. The court reasoned that the legislative intent behind the statute was to protect public entities from lawsuits brought by voluntary users of public lands for recreational purposes, such as hang gliding or rock climbing. A compulsory, supervised physical education class does not constitute a "recreational" activity within the meaning of the statute. The court emphasized that school districts have a long-standing, independent statutory duty to supervise students during school-related functions and activities taking place during school hours. Applying the hazardous recreational activity immunity in this context would improperly undermine this established duty of care.
Analysis:
This decision significantly narrows the scope of Government Code § 831.7's immunity as it applies to public schools. It establishes a critical distinction between truly voluntary recreational pursuits on public property and compulsory, supervised activities that are integral to a school's curriculum. By defining a mandatory P.E. class as non-"recreational" for the purposes of the statute, the court preserved the well-established tort duty of schools to supervise students. This precedent prevents school districts from using the statute as a shield against liability for negligence occurring within their core educational programs during the school day.
Unlock the full brief for Iverson v. Muroc Unified School District