## Facts

- B.M., a minor raised by foster parents Fred and Leona Burger, exhibited speech and learning difficulties in kindergarten and tested with an IQ of 76.
- A psychologist recommended special education services.
- State policies generally limited classification as “mentally retarded” to IQ scores between 50 and 75, but school officials sought and obtained State approval to classify B.M. as mentally retarded.
- B.M. was first placed in a special program that supported participation in regular classes with special education assistance.
- Without notifying the Burgers, the program was changed so B.M. and other classified students spent about 40% of class time in a segregated resource room.
- Leona Burger alleged that B.M.’s behavior worsened after the change and sued the State and related officials for negligent misclassification and negligent placement, seeking damages for educational and emotional harm.

## Issues

1. Whether the State was immune from negligence liability for acts connected to administering special education programs, including classification and placement decisions.
2. Whether the State owed a legal duty of due care to students regarding special-education classification and placement decisions.
3. Whether negligent misclassification or placement, without more, violated due process or equal protection under the state or federal constitutions.

## Decision

- The court reversed summary judgment for the State on immunity and duty grounds and remanded for further proceedings on the negligence claim.
- The court held the State was not shielded by governmental immunity for negligence claims arising from administration of special education programs.
- The court held the State owed a duty to use due care in placing students in special education programs.
- The court agreed that negligent misplacement, standing alone, did not establish due process or equal protection violations.

## Legal Principles

- Governmental immunity does not bar negligence claims against the State for operational administration of special education programs, including student placement decisions.
- When the State creates, regulates, approves, and oversees special education classification and placement, it owes affected students a duty to exercise reasonable care in those decisions.
- Negligence in educational classification or placement is ordinarily a tort claim requiring proof of duty, breach, causation, and damages; it does not become a due process or equal protection violation absent additional conduct such as arbitrary, discriminatory, or intentional deprivation of rights.

## Conclusion

The court allowed a negligence action to proceed against the State for alleged misclassification and misplacement in special education by recognizing a duty of due care and rejecting immunity, while declining to treat negligent placement alone as a constitutional violation.


B.M. v. State, 649 P.2d 425 (Mont. 1982)