Schneider

Schneider v. Conejo Valley Unified School Dist. CA2/6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 2, 2024B334090California3,049 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cody, J.

Filed 12/2/24 Schneider v. Conejo Valley Unified School Dist. CA2/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

STEVEN SCHNEIDER et al., 2d Civ. No. B334090 (Super. Ct. No. 56-2022- Plaintiffs and Appellants, 00571547-CU-WM-VTA) (Ventura County) v.

CONEJO VALLEY UNIFIED

SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendant and Respondent.

Steven Schneider and Carrie Burgert appeal after the trial court sustained without leave to amend a demurrer by the Conejo Valley Unified School District (District). Appellants alleged the District’s Teen Talk sexual education program violated state law. Appellants also claimed defective notice regarding Teen Talk and surveys administered to students, as well as a violation of their state privacy rights due to a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.