Roe

Roe v. Hacienda La Puente Unified School Dist. CA2/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 24, 2022B310850California3,326 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Roe attended Los Altos High School. In 2010, after ninth grade, she sought to enroll in a summer school chemistry class, to prepare for an advanced placement (AP) class in the fall. The summer class was full but the teacher, David Park, told Roe she could attend on a noncredit basis. She sat by Park’s desk because there were no other available seats in the classroom. Park never spoke inappropriately to Roe in class or in front of others; however, he obtained her cell phone number and began texting her outside of school, asking questions about her sex life. Roe knew the texts were inappropriate but decided not to tell anyone. She felt scared, did not want to be in the limelight, and believed people would think she was at fault. In 10th grade, Roe ate lunch with Park in his classroom, almost daily, for the entire school year. Sometimes they were joined by other students. Roe and Park talked about her home, parents and school; they did not discuss sex. Roe’s AP chemistry

2 teacher, Mr. Ackerman, was in an adjoining classroom and, according to Roe, was “aware” that Roe and Park lunched together. No other school staff members knew of their lunches. Park entered Ackerman’s…

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.