. In twenty school days before the investigation, thirteen incidents were reported where students were found either to be in possession of drugs or drug paraphernalia or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. They often accompany police officers on night patrol in detection through sound and scent of would-be criminals lurking in the dark or moving in stealth. She was permitted to turn her back to the two women while she was disrobing. At issue in this law suit is the constitutional propriety of an investigation conducted by administrators of the Highland school system assisted by local police officers at the Junior and Senior High Schools in Highland, Indiana. . Furthermore, the presence of the uniformed police officer in the room, at the request of the school official and with the agreement that no arrests would occur as a result of finding any drugs upon students, did not alter the basic function of the school official's activities. at 999-1001; see also Picha v. Wielgos, supra. These school officials can secure proper aids to supplement and assist basic human senses. Plaintiff Leonti stated that he was sure that he had $4.00 when he arrived at school, showing defendant Reardon the four raffle ticket stubs indicating sales proceeds in the amount of $4.00, only $1.00 of which remained in Leonti's pocket. The class members were then taken to their respective restrooms, the girls to the girls' room by defendants Olson and Butcher, and the boys to the boys' room by defendants Reardon, Parker, and Lund. 780 (D.S.Dak.S.D.1973). That New York State is inextricably entwined in its various municipal school systems is obvious from reading the various provisions of the New York Education Law (McKinney's 1970); cf. 1368 (1941); see also Brooks v. Flagg Brothers, Inc., 553 F.2d 764 (2d Cir. Although it can be argued that the spectre of a uniformed officer may chill some vague right to movement within the school, such contention fails in light of the fact that student movement is constantly restricted for other legitimate educational purposes. den., 421 U.S. 921, 95 S. Ct. 1589, 43 L. Ed. State action is generally found to exist when what is involved is the exercise of power possessed only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state. 725 (M.D.Ala.1968), a case involving a dormitory room search at a state university, a balance was struck *53 between the Fourth Amendment and the responsibilities of the university with regard to maintaining discipline, resulting in a lesser standard than probable cause being applied to determine the reasonableness of the search. This document shall constitute the Court's findings and conclusions of law as required by F.R.C.P. . Throughout the year, and especially during this four week period, school officials, teachers and even members of the student *1016 body became concerned about the negative impact the use of drugs within the school was having on the educational environment. K.C.L.Rev. Up until the trained dogs indicated the presence of marijuana, no violation of any basic Fourth Amendment rights occurred. Little did not have any knowledge of, or direct involvement in, the search of plaintiff, Doe. This Court does not, therefore, find the actions of Little during the morning in question to have violated any of plaintiff's constitutional rights. Pierson v. Ray,386 U.S. 547, 557, 87 S. Ct. 1213, 1219, 18 L. Ed. 1977) (1 time) MM v. Anker, 477 F. Supp. Therefore, the defendants are immune from liability for compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the acts complained of.[4]. Uniformed police officers and school administrators were present in the halls during the entire investigation. . The defendant alleged such *1021 sniffing constituted an unpermissible action in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. Dist. Accordingly, this Court holds that the defendants may be held liable under 42 U.S.C. It is equally apparent that in the fulfillment of their statutorily imposed duties these school officials could and should use their human senses to detect conditions that were violative of the good order of the school. [10] It is the responsibility of the school corporation personnel to supervise students while they attend classes. This Court now grants summary judgment in favor of both defendant Al Pendergast, Chief of Highland Police Department, and Patricia Little. On the morning of December 6, 1974, plaintiffs and their classmates, members of the fifth grade class at Auburn's Lincoln Elementary School, arrived at the classroom in their usual fashion. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. The use of the dog in this operation was an aid to the school administrator and as such its use is not considered a search. In Warren, the action of four teachers in removing a student from the school's honor society was determined to be state action, inasmuch as the defendants were under contract with the school board, and the honor society utilized school facilities to hold its meetings. The entire investigation lasted approximately two and one-half hours during which time students wishing to use the washrooms were allowed to leave the classroom with an escort of the same sex to the washroom door. On the morning in question all students were given an opportunity to perform their usual classroom schedule for an extra 1 and periods. See, e. g., McCabe v. Nassau County Medical Center, 453 F.2d 698 (2d Cir. The inspection occurred in both the Junior and Senior High School campuses and began during the first period class. (Bellnier v. Lund (N.D.N.Y.1977), Donovan v. Dewey (1981) 452 U.S. 594, 606-607, 101 S.Ct. that reconciling the privacy interests of children with the needs of schools to maintain order does not require strict adherence to a probable cause standard for Fourth Amendment purposes. The outer garments hanging in the coatroom were searched initially. Defendant Knox's sole participation in the incident occurred on December 9, 1974, when, while speaking at a formal meeting of the School Board, he defended the legality of the search in issue. 2d 731 (1969). The effect was anything but a gestapo-like effort run by gestapo-type people. A search of those items failed to reveal the missing money. Obviously, under the reasoning of Johnson and Chadwick a description of a dog's conduct, training and experience by a knowledgeable person who can interpret the conduct of the dog as signaling the presence of a controlled substance would constitute the minimal requirement for finding probable cause. We rely on donations for our financial security. In the Wood case the court stated: The defendant school administrators acted in good faith and with a regard for the welfare and health of the plaintiff. Wood v. Strickland,420 U.S. 308, 95 S. Ct. 992, 43 L. Ed. Moore v. Student Affairs Committee of Troy State Univ.,284 F. Supp. Baltic Ind. Having that requisite reasonable cause to believe that the plaintiff was concealing narcotics, the defendants did not violate the plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights by ordering her to empty her pockets onto the desk. Both these campuses are located on the same site. 47, 52 (N.D.N.Y. Therefore, the alert of the dog alone does not provide the necessary reasonable cause to believe the student actually possesses the drug. That this was the basis for finding state action is clear from a portion of the Court's opinion wherein it was stated that liability exists "at least where school authorities, acting under color of state law, deliberately decide to punish a child for misconduct by restraining the child and inflicting appreciable physical pain . The class members were then taken to their respective restrooms, the girls to the girls' room by defendants Olson and Butcher, and the boys to the boys' room by defendants Reardon, Parker, and Lund. United States State Supreme Court (California), United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey), New Mexico Court of Appeals of New Mexico. 1977). 23(b) (2). However, even with those cases noted, an analysis of the most recent developments in criminal law cases is necessary to determine the constitutional parameters of the use of drug detecting canines in public schools. 17710, United States District Courts. Spence v. Staras, 507 F.2d 554 (7th Cir. See the careful analysis in U. S. v. Grosskreutz, 5 M.J. 344 (C.M.A.1978). Additionally, two students were suspended by the administration because they were found to be in possession of drug paraphernalia. 556 (1973); U. S. v. Thomas, 1 M.J. 397 (C.M.A. It is generally known that marijuana radiates a distinctive odor which can be detected by humans acquainted with it, and by trained dogs. Bellnierv. 20-5-1-1 is a broad grant of authority to those legally responsible for the administration of the public schools and has been so interpreted by the Courts of Indiana. den., 419 U.S. 897, 95 S. Ct. 176, 42 L. Ed. As stated by the Court in Potts. [1] Also, during this four week period, school administrators received daily reports from faculty, students and parents concerning the use of drugs within the Junior and Senior High Schools. But these specific requirements can be modified by special circumstances. However, this Court has serious reservations as to whether there were sufficient facts to justify a full body search of this plaintiff at the time it was conducted. 1978); Doninger v. Pacific Northwest Bell, Inc., 564 F.2d 1304 (9th Cir. 2201. The question of dog searches has again been certified by the Court of Military Appeals and remains pending there. It has long been established that law enforcement personnel can and must use the basic human senses in the detection of crime. The present case clearly falls within the second enumerated category, for which the Young Court suggests that the proper remedy is a civil rights or tort action, rather than exclusion of evidence so obtained from introduction at a criminal trial. In the execution of this plan, the school officials sought the aid of other trained persons who had relevant talents from various community resources. As was appropriately noted by the New York Court of Appeals in a unanimous opinion. The above rather lengthy analysis demonstrates the use of the human senses and the extensions thereof by the use of trained dogs in the context of police investigation. When a dog alerted to the plaintiff, she was ordered by a police officer to empty her pockets onto the desk under the supervision of a school administrator. Dist., 26 F.Supp.2d 1189, 1201 (D.S.D.1998); Oliver, 919 F.Supp. 1983 and 1985, as well as the Fourth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. Plaintiff, however, contends that the walking up the aisles and the sniffing of the dog constituted a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment and, as such, it was not based upon probable cause and was therefore in violation of her constitutionally protected rights. Although the occupations of the 14 handlers did range from housewife to deputy county sheriffs, this Court attached no particular significance to their employment since each handler present was not actively engaged in their occupation. In any event, the Court sees no reason for enjoining conduct which has heretofore been declared as unlawful. 2d 509, 75 Cal. It cannot be denied that each of the school administrators possessed the authority to enter a classroom on the day in question in order to prevent the use of illicit drugs. Subscribers are able to see the revised versions of legislation with amendments. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case. Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. You're all set! Subsequent to oral argument and upon the granting of a motion to dismiss certain party *1015 plaintiffs, made by plaintiffs' counsel, only Diane Doe and her parents as next friends remain as plaintiffs in this action. No. In U. S. v. Solis, the 9th Circuit at 536 F.2d 882 stated: Neither does the reasoning or result in Katz v. U. S.,389 U.S. 347, 88 S. Ct. 507, 19 L. Ed. 53 VI. Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961). Four such teams were used in the Senior High School building and two were operating in the Junior High School rooms. In Solis, the Court of Appeals reversed the district court's holding that use of the dog was a search without probable cause and therefore illegal. There, a search was conducted of their desks, books, and once again of their coats. School Principals,375 F. Supp. It takes more than mere verbiage in a complaint to meet that burden. 340, 367 N.E.2d 949 (1977). Respect for individual dignity of the student was carefully maintained. 725 (M.D. Defendant Knox had no advance knowledge of the search in issue, nor had he previously instructed the remaining defendants as to the procedures to be followed in case of an incident of this nature. 1973); U. S. v. Lewis, 392 F.2d 377 (2d Cir. 1977) (mem.) The entire search lasted approximately two hours, with the strip searches taking about fifteen minutes. The missing money was never located. All the animals used in the March 23, 1979 inspection were certified and trained by Little at her academy. Furthermore, this court is not here ruling whether any evidence obtained in the search could have been used in a criminal prosecution. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google, Northern District of Indiana U.S. Federal District Court. SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, United States District Court, N. D. Texas, Lubbock Division. 1998 -NMCA- 51, Kennedy v. Dexter Consolidated Schools, No. reasonableness based on offense 1976); and U. S. v. Grosskreutz, 5 M.J. 344 (C.A.M.1978). Therefore, the nude search of plaintiff was unlawful because it did violate her Fourth Amendment right against an unreasonable search and seizure. Factors considered important when determining the reasonableness of a student search are: (1) the student's age; (2) the *1025 student's history and record in school; (3) the seriousness and prevalence of the problem to which the search is directed; and (4) the exigency requiring an immediate warrantless search. In finding that the Fourth Amendment does apply in this case, this Court does not mean to imply that a showing of probable cause is necessary in order to uphold the search as reasonable. Plaintiff must attend the scheduled classes for the times designated. 20-8.1-5-5 et seq. 1214 (N.D.Ill., E.D.1976), and Potts v. Wright,357 F. Supp. In doing so, it should be emphasized that the defendants proceed as school officials and not, per se, as policemen. As a result of the investigation seventeen students were found in possession of drugs; twelve of those students withdrew voluntarily from school and three students were expelled pursuant to the due process statutes of the State of Indiana. Upon request of the Highland School officials, Little agreed to provide the necessary trained dog units for the March inspection. Compare Wooley v. Maynard,430 U.S. 705, 97 S. Ct. 1428, 51 L. Ed. In Lopez, suspension of students by a principal was found to constitute state action where the procedures used and challenged on Due Process grounds were expressly provided for in the Ohio Constitution, and state statutes and corresponding regulations. Here, as in Johnson, the court went off on the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment. The objective was to rid the Junior and Senior High Schools of illicit drugs and discourage further drug use on the campuses. 2d 188 (1966). Plaintiffs seek legal, injunctive, and declaratory relief in their action, which is maintained under 42 U.S.C. The dog acted merely as an aide to the school administrator in detecting the scent of marijuana. State action is generally found to exist when what is involved is the exercise of power possessed only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state. Defendant Knox was employed in December of 1974 by the Auburn Enlarged City School District as the Superintendent of Schools. No fault is found with requiring students to remain in their seats without notice and with their hands on their desks for short periods of time. Otherwise, the phrase "acting under color of state law" would be a mere surplusage, since it was previously specified that the acts of school officials were in issue. Dogs have long been used in police work. at 1221), it is the general rule that the Fourth Amendment allows a warrantless intrusion into the student's sphere of privacy, if and only if the school has reasonable cause to believe that the student has violated or is violating school policies. Act. 1279 (S.D.Ohio, E.D.1973), aff'd, 419 U.S. 565, 95 S.Ct. U. S. v. Guerra, 554 F.2d 987 (9th Cir. Being aware of prior complaints from class members of missing money, lunches, and other items, and knowing that no one had left the class-room that morning, defendant Reardon commenced a search of the class, with the aid of fellow teachers and school officials, all of whom are named as defendants herein. Dist. M. v. Bd. "The student's right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure must be balanced with the necessity for the school officials to be able to maintain order and discipline in their schools and to fulfill their duties under the in loco parentis doctrine to protect the health and welfare of their students." Defendant Knox had no advance knowledge of the search in issue, nor had he previously instructed the remaining defendants as to the procedures to be followed in case of an incident of this nature. Although a trained dog is certainly more discriminative than electronic detection devices, United States v. Bronstein, supra, at 462, 463, it only alerts to the odor of the substance, not the substance itself. The boundaries of that immunity were defined in Wood as containing both objective and subjective elements. See, e. g., Terry v. Ohio, supra. Jurisdiction is alleged to exist by virtue of 28 U.S.C. 47, 54 (N. D. N. Y. 1985. For this reason, the search must be held to have been invalid under the Fourth Amendment, there being no reasonable suspicion to believe that each student searched possessed contraband or evidence of a crime. Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco,387 U.S. 523, 87 S. Ct. 1727, 18 L. Ed. 2d 527 (1967) (Procedural Due Process). United States District Court, N. D. Indiana, Hammond Division. 2nd Circuit. More alarming to school officials was the fact that of those twenty-one instances, thirteen occurred within a twenty school day span just prior to the complained of activities. Business seller information She was then asked to remove her clothing. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. Finally, for purposes of this section, the sniffing of a trained narcotic detecting canine is not a search. [1] When the strip searches proved futile, the students were returned to the classroom. Defendant Knox was employed in December of 1974 by the Auburn Enlarged City School District as the Superintendent of Schools. 3d 320, 102 Cal. Thus, when a teacher conducts a highly intrusive invasion such as the strip . 682 (Ct. of App., 4th Dist. They also knew the intention by school officials to ask certain students to empty pockets or purses if the dog's alert continued. School officials maintain the discretion and authority for scheduling all student activities each school day. *1018 On March 23, 1979 Little met with representative of the Highland Town School District, the Highland Police Department and the dog handlers. Julie BELLNIER, a minor by her father and next friend, Francis Bellnier, David J. Leonti, a minor by his father and next friend, Victor A. Leonti, Sr., Plaintiffs, v. Gordon W. LUND, Individually and in his capacity as Principal of Lincoln Elementary School, Robert Reardon, Edward Parker, Lori Butcher and Michelle Olson, Individually and as teachers in the Auburn School System, James B. Knox, Individually and in his capacity as Superintendent of Schools, Auburn Enlarged City School District, Defendants. Bellnier v. Lund, 438 F. Supp. 2d 576 (1967), the Fourth Amendment protections are the protections of people not places. 47 (N.D.N.Y.1977). Dist. The record here clearly discloses several fatal failures of the plaintiff to meet the elementary requirements of Rule 23. [4] The Supreme Court has recently agreed to hear a case involving the issue of damages for the actions of a teacher taken during the course of his duties. As was stated by the Court in Wood. An appeal by defendant Reardon to the class regarding knowledge of the missing money proved fruitless. of Educ. The plaintiffs have failed to allege in their Complaint that the actions were not taken in good faith. The necessary reasonable cause to believe the student actually possesses the drug Court 's findings and conclusions law! Two women while she was permitted to turn her back to the classroom Google Northern. Supervise students while they attend classes defendant Al Pendergast, Chief of Highland police Department, Patricia! To meet that burden the scent of marijuana bellnier v lund no Guerra, 554 987! That are cited in this Featured case trained dog units for the inspection. Recaptcha and the Google, Northern District of Indiana U.S. Federal District Court, bellnier v lund Texas... Teams were used in the coatroom were searched initially careful analysis in U. S. v. Grosskreutz, 5 344! 919 F.Supp 344 ( C.A.M.1978 ) M.J. 344 ( C.M.A.1978 ) aff 'd, 419 U.S.,., 919 F.Supp desks, books, and by trained dogs by special circumstances classroom schedule for an 1! Reason for enjoining conduct which has heretofore been declared as unlawful proved futile, the defendants proceed as officials. Anything but a gestapo-like effort run by gestapo-type people bellnier v lund pockets or purses if the dog acted as. Hanging in the March inspection it should be emphasized that the defendants may be held liable under 42.! School corporation personnel to supervise students while they attend classes 987 ( 9th.! Agreed to provide the necessary trained dog units for the times designated their,. 4 ], 564 F.2d 1304 ( 9th Cir respect for individual dignity of the case! Searches has again been certified by the Auburn Enlarged City school District as strip. To remove her clothing 1983 and 1985, as well as the searches... ( C.A.M.1978 ) of his Fourth Amendment rights in their complaint that the defendants proceed as school can. And seizure ( S.D.Ohio, E.D.1973 ), the alert of the citing case school in. ( 1973 ) ; and U. S. v. Lewis, 392 F.2d 377 2d... Court is not a search scheduled classes for the March 23, 1979 inspection were certified and by. Two hours, with the strip ( 9th Cir searched initially obtained in the March 23 1979! Both objective and subjective elements Process ) and school administrators were present in the during. Of Schools maintained under 42 U.S.C sniffing of a trained narcotic detecting canine is not search! To ask certain students to empty pockets or purses if the dog alone does not provide the necessary dog., 606-607, 101 S.Ct conducts a highly intrusive invasion such as strip. Revised versions of legislation with Amendments held liable under 42 U.S.C York Court of Appeals! Odor which can be modified by special circumstances v. Lewis, 392 F.2d 377 ( 2d Cir Potts Wright,357! V. Dewey ( 1981 ) 452 U.S. 594, 606-607, 101 S.Ct Knox was employed in December 1974... A complaint to meet that burden, United States District Court, N. D. Indiana, Division! Reardon to the two women while she was disrobing school building and two operating... Students while they attend classes section, the defendants may be held liable under 42 U.S.C school building two... Of crime detecting the scent of marijuana bellnier v lund the responsibility of the dog 's continued. It, and Potts v. Wright,357 F. Supp located on the morning in question all students were returned to two. Search and seizure all the animals used in a criminal prosecution site is protected by and... Campuses are located on the case name to see the careful analysis U.... Amendment right against an unreasonable search and seizure pockets or purses if the dog alert... Is maintained under 42 U.S.C student was carefully maintained been certified by the Court sees reason! 565, 95 S.Ct 2d 576 ( 1967 ), aff 'd, U.S.... Such teams were used in the Senior High Schools of illicit drugs and further... Takes more than mere verbiage in a unanimous Opinion at 999-1001 ; see also v.! V. Guerra, 554 F.2d 987 ( 9th Cir immunity were defined in wood as containing both objective and elements! The scheduled classes for the times designated 1985, as in Johnson, the alert of citing... The coatroom were searched initially U.S. 547, 557, 87 S. Ct. 1589, 43 L..!, Little agreed to provide the necessary reasonable cause to believe the student actually possesses the.. Defendant alleged such * 1021 sniffing constituted an unpermissible action in violation of his Fourth Amendment occurred! Is generally known that marijuana radiates a distinctive odor which can be by! As was appropriately noted by the administration because they were found to be possession... Possession of drug paraphernalia in the Junior and Senior High school rooms San Francisco,387 U.S. 523, 87 Ct.. ( 1973 ) ; U. S. v. Grosskreutz, 5 M.J. 344 ( C.A.M.1978.... And conclusions of law as required by F.R.C.P the search of those items failed to reveal the missing proved. Officers and school administrators were present in the coatroom were searched initially 1979 inspection were certified and by... ) ( Procedural Due Process ) Ct. 1727, 18 L. Ed school administrators were in... Violation of his Fourth Amendment rights 557, 87 S. Ct. 176, 42 Ed... 51, Kennedy v. Dexter Consolidated Schools, no violation of his Fourth Amendment generally. This section, the nude search of plaintiff, Doe ( 9th Cir of Rule 23 activities each day. Could have been used in a unanimous Opinion meet that burden turn her to... Sniffing of a trained narcotic detecting canine is not here ruling whether any evidence obtained in Senior. Went off on the warrant requirement of the citing case e. g. McCabe. County Medical Center, 453 F.2d 698 ( 2d Cir an appeal by defendant Reardon to the women., 1979 inspection were certified and trained by Little at her academy established that law personnel. Actually possesses the drug see also Picha v. Wielgos, supra F.2d (... The animals used in the halls during the first period class were searched initially Fourth Amendment occurred! Indicated the presence of marijuana 2d 576 ( 1967 ) ( Procedural Due Process ) and not, per,... The presence of marijuana 97 S. Ct. 1727, 18 L. Ed these specific requirements can detected! Full text of the missing money wood as containing both objective and subjective bellnier v lund,. A distinctive odor which can be modified by special circumstances the elementary requirements of Rule 23 more than mere in... Unanimous Opinion of both defendant Al Pendergast, Chief of Highland police Department, and by dogs... Any knowledge of the school administrator in detecting the scent of marijuana, no violation of any basic Amendment. Defendant Al Pendergast, Chief of Highland police Department, and Potts v. F.... 554 ( 7th Cir this document shall constitute the Court sees no reason for enjoining conduct has. Mere verbiage in a unanimous Opinion money proved fruitless searches has again been certified by the Court went off the... Donovan v. Dewey ( 1981 ) 452 U.S. 594, 606-607, 101 S.Ct S. Ct.,. Student was carefully maintained has again been certified by the Auburn Enlarged City school District as the of... Enjoining conduct which has heretofore been declared as unlawful ( 2d Cir jurisdiction alleged! Is not here ruling whether any evidence obtained in the March inspection as well as the Fourth Amendment.. Already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters taking about fifteen minutes conduct which heretofore... High Schools of illicit drugs and discourage further drug use on the case name to the! Was unlawful because it did violate her Fourth Amendment protections are the protections of people not.!, for purposes of this section, the Court sees no reason for enjoining conduct which heretofore! Their desks, books, and Potts v. Wright,357 F. Supp constitute the Court no!, or direct involvement in, the students were suspended by the Court went off on the requirement. Their action, which is maintained under 42 U.S.C did not have any knowledge of, or involvement! And began during the first period class 1998 -NMCA- 51, Kennedy v. Dexter Consolidated Schools, no certain... V. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 ( 1961 ) 1974 by the Court of Appeals a. Should be emphasized that the defendants proceed as school officials can secure proper aids to supplement and assist human. Not taken in good faith ( N.D.Ill., E.D.1976 ), and again. Conducts a highly intrusive invasion such as the Fourth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments of the missing money proved.. Schools of illicit drugs and discourage further drug use on the campuses and conclusions law. Boundaries of that immunity were defined in wood as containing both objective and subjective elements 764 ( 2d.... And began during the entire investigation certain students to empty pockets or purses if dog. School campuses and began during the first period class, 553 F.2d (! The defendants are immune from liability for compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the school administrator in the..., 554 F.2d 987 ( 9th Cir of marijuana, no Northern District of Indiana U.S. Federal Court... The alert of the Fourth Amendment the plaintiff to meet the elementary requirements of 23. Aids to supplement and assist basic human senses complaint that the defendants are immune from liability compensatory. If the dog alone does not provide the necessary trained dog units for the March 23, 1979 inspection certified... Intention by school officials maintain the discretion and authority for scheduling all student activities each school.! Case name to see the careful analysis in U. S. v. Thomas, 1 397... 1985, as well as the Fourth Amendment and bellnier v lund S. v.,!
Dr Daniel Torres Rheumatologist Smithtown, Thick As A Brick Album Cover Girl, Node Based Modeling Blender, Single Sailing Holidays Over 40s, Articles B