## Facts

- On August 3, 1989, Rodney J. Hurlburt (a minor) boarded a school bus operated by the Bainbridge‑Guilford Central School District to attend summer school in Windsor, New York.
- The bus route included a stop in Afton, New York, to pick up additional students.
- During the Afton stop, Hurlburt and several other students got off the bus to ride the rest of the way in the private car of fellow student Sean Noxon.
- The school district had a policy that no student could leave the bus before reaching its destination unless the student presented written permission from a parent; Hurlburt had no written permission.
- The bus driver saw Hurlburt leave the bus and asked, “where are you going?” A student replied, “it’s okay that we get off,” and the driver did not ask further questions or prevent the students from leaving.
- On prior occasions, Hurlburt had exited at the Afton stop and ridden with Noxon to school without incident.
- After Hurlburt entered Noxon’s car, Noxon was involved in a motor-vehicle accident, and Hurlburt suffered injuries.
- Hurlburt (by his father and natural guardian) and his father individually sued, alleging the school district negligently supervised Hurlburt by permitting him to leave the bus contrary to district policy.
- The plaintiffs and the school district filed cross‑motions for summary judgment.

## Issues

1. Whether the school district’s duty to supervise a student, arising from its in loco parentis role and the student’s entry onto the school bus, continued after the student left the bus at an intermediate stop without the required written parental permission to ride in a private car.
2. Whether any failure by school personnel to stop the student from leaving the bus was a proximate cause of the student’s injuries, or whether the student’s decision to leave the bus and the private driver’s conduct were intervening acts that cut off liability.

## Decision

- The court granted the Bainbridge‑Guilford Central School District’s motion for summary judgment.
- The court denied the plaintiffs’ cross‑motion for summary judgment.
- The court held that the district was not liable for injuries Hurlburt sustained in the off‑bus automobile accident after he left the school bus to ride in a private vehicle outside the district’s control.

## Legal Principles

- A school district acts in loco parentis and must exercise the degree of care that a reasonably prudent parent would provide under similar circumstances.
- The district’s supervisory duty generally begins when the student enters the school’s custody, including entry onto a school bus, and includes supervision while the student is on school premises or on the bus.
- The duty is limited to times and places where the district has custody and control; it is not a general obligation to protect students from all risks once they are outside school supervision.
- New York recognizes a defined zone of school responsibility for certain hazards connected to students leaving a school bus (including statutory responsibilities for injuries directly following exit), but that responsibility does not extend to a student’s later injuries in a separate, privately operated vehicle beyond school control.
- Where a student voluntarily leaves school transportation in violation of school rules to ride in a private car, and an accident later occurs in that private car, the student’s departure and the private driver’s conduct may break the causal link between any alleged supervision lapse and the eventual injury, absent facts showing school control over the private vehicle or knowledge of a specific, immediate danger.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that although the school district’s responsibility begins when a student boards a school bus, it does not extend to injuries suffered after the student leaves the bus without written parental permission to ride in a private car; once Hurlburt chose to leave school transportation and entered a vehicle outside the district’s custody and control, the later accident did not support negligent-supervision liability against the district.


Hurlburt v. Noxon, 149 Misc. 2d 374 (1990)