## Facts

- Todd M. Glaser, a seventh-grade student at Lowther Middle School in Emporia, Kansas, arrived at school about 25 minutes before classes began and remained outside the school building.
- The school district did not provide supervision outside the building before school and did not supervise students until they were in the building.
- Another student chased Glaser on or near school property; Glaser ran off school grounds into an adjacent public street.
- Glaser was injured in a collision with a car driven by Patricia Gould-Lipson on a public street before classes began.
- Glaser sued the driver, the school district, and teacher Douglas Epp for negligence based on alleged failure to supervise and protect him.
- Glaser settled with the driver; the remaining claims proceeded against the school district and Epp.

## Issues

1. Whether a school district and its employee owe a duty to supervise and protect a student who is outside the school building, before classes begin, and injured on an adjacent public street.
2. Whether the school district or teacher voluntarily assumed a duty to supervise students outside before school through policies, practices, or conduct.
3. Whether summary judgment was proper where the material facts bearing on duty, custody/control, and any assumed duty were undisputed.

## Decision

- The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for the school district and Epp.
- The court held the defendants owed no duty because Glaser was not in the district’s custody or control at the time of the injury.
- The court further held the district had not assumed a duty to supervise students outside the building before school by any affirmative act or promise.
- Because duty was absent as a matter of law on undisputed facts, defendants were entitled to judgment.

## Legal Principles

- Summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
- Whether a duty exists is a question of law subject to unlimited appellate review.
- A school district generally has no duty to supervise or protect students who are not in its custody or control, absent an assumed duty created by an affirmative act or promise.
- A party who does not undertake to render services does not owe a duty to third persons based solely on nonperformance.
- General safety policies calling for intervention when a teacher observes danger do not, without a specific undertaking, create a duty to supervise students outside the district’s custodial control.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that a student injured off campus on a public street before classes began was outside the school district’s custody and control, and the district had not affirmatively undertaken pre-school outdoor supervision; therefore, no negligence duty existed and summary judgment for the district and teacher was affirmed.


Glaser v. Emporia Unified Sch. Dist. No. 253, 271 Kan. 178, 21 P.3d 573 (Kan. 2001)