Robinson v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Edu.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedAugust 2, 2007
DocketI.C. NO. TA-17702.
StatusPublished

This text of Robinson v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Edu. (Robinson v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Edu.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Carolina Industrial Commission primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Robinson v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Edu., (N.C. Super. Ct. 2007).

Opinion

* * * * * * * * * * *
The undersigned have reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Chief Deputy Commissioner Gheen and the briefs and arguments of the parties. The appealing party has not shown good ground to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, rehear the parties or their representatives, and having reviewed the competent evidence of record, the Full Commission adopts the Opinion and Award of Chief Deputy Commissioner Gheen with modifications.

* * * * * * * * * * *
The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following, which were entered into by the parties at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner as:

STIPULATIONS
1. The parties did not stipulate to any facts.

* * * * * * * * * * * *Page 2
RULING ON PROCEDURAL MATTERS: PLAINTIFFS' REPLY ASSERTING DOCTRINE OF LAST CLEAR CHANCE AND HANDBOOK FOR SCHOOL BUS DRIVERS
Because plaintiffs acknowledged that its Reply asserting the doctrine of Last Clear Chance was not timely filed, this issue will not be addressed herein.

Since the record shows that the Handbook for School Bus Drivers was neither identified nor introduced into the record of evidence, the Handbook was not considered in reaching the decision herein.

* * * * * * * * * * *
Based upon all of the competent evidence of record and reasonable inferences flowing therefrom, the Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Quanterio Robinson (hereinafter Mr. Robinson) was born on November 2, 1985. He was 14 years old and a student in the 7th grade at Bradley Middle School on the date he was injured.

2. On the afternoon of May 18, 2000, Mr. Robinson was on his way home from Bradley Middle School on Charlotte-Mecklenburg School Bus Number 323. The operator of Bus 323 was Tobbi Leticia Bolden, its usual operator.

3. The customary route for Bus 323 turns onto Neck Road from Beatties Ford Road and the first passenger stop is at the intersection of Neck Road and Johnson Davis Road. This was Mr. Robinson's assigned stop to depart the bus. Bus 323 would then proceed through the area to a second scheduled stop further into the neighborhood on Neck Road, then turn around and proceed on Neck Road towards Beatties Ford Road. *Page 3

4. The bus would typically make a second stop at the Neck Road/Johnson Davis Road intersection before the bus would proceed to enter Beatties Ford Road. Mr. Robinson and other students would often forgo departing the bus on its first stop at the Neck Road/Johnson Davis Road intersection and wait to depart the bus when it stopped a second time at that intersection.

5. On May 18, 2000, Mr. Robinson did not depart Bus 323 at his assigned stop. As Ms. Bolden approached the Neck Road/Johnson Davis Road intersection for the second time, she told the students that she was not stopping and she was taking the students back to the bus garage. Ms. Bolden testified that she was playing a joke on the students, that she intended on passing the designated bus stop a little bit and then stopping to let the students off the bus. The majority of the students understood Ms. Bolden was playing around or joking with them. However, Mr. Robinson told Ms. Bolden that if she did not stop the bus, he would jump off.

6. As Ms. Bolden approached and was just past the usual bus stop, Mr. Robinson crouched down and began trying to open the emergency exit door at the back of the bus. The first time Mr. Robinson opened the emergency exit door, an alarm was activated, Ms. Bolden told Mr. Robinson to close the door, and the alarm ceased. Ms. Bolden did not immediately stop the bus. Ms. Bolden did not clarify to Mr. Robinson that she was only joking and that she actually intended to stop the bus to let Mr. Robinson and the other students depart.

7. Mr. Robinson initially complied with Ms. Bolden's instruction to close the door, but he again opened the emergency exit door at least one more time causing the alarm to activate again. Then, almost immediately, Mr. Robinson jumped out of the emergency exit door while the bus was moving. The acts of opening of the door and jumping out occurred so quickly that *Page 4 Ms. Bolden did not have time to respond in any manner. At that point, the students notified Ms. Bolden of what had happened and Ms. Bolden brought the bus to a stop.

8. As a consequence of jumping from the bus, Mr. Robinson suffered severe traumatic brain injury, including a right subdural hematoma with cerebral contusions and Barrow trauma requiring multiple chest tubes. Mr. Robinson's injuries have resulted in permanent disabilities.

9. Plaintiff, Penny Robinson, incurred medical expenses totaling $278,236.02.

10. The evidence does not establish any condition that prevented Ms. Bolden from immediately stopping the bus when Mr. Robinson first opened the emergency exit door and clarifying to Mr. Robinson that she was only joking, that she had every intention of allowing him off the bus, and that she was not taking the students back to the bus garage.

11. There is no evidence that Mr. Robinson lacked the maturity and discretion associated with an individual who is 14 years old.

* * * * * * * * * * *
Based upon the foregoing stipulations and findings of fact, the Full Commission reaches the following:

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Plaintiffs' claim is filed pursuant to the North Carolina State Tort Claims Act. The Industrial Commission has jurisdiction to hear and determine tort claims against any county board of education where the claim arose as a result of the negligent act or omission of the school bus driver who was employed at the time by the county administrative unit of which such board was the governing body. N.C. Gen Stat. §143-300.1. *Page 5

2. Under the Tort Claims Act, negligence, contributory negligence, and proximate cause are determined under the same rules as those applicable to private individuals. Barney v. North Carolina State HighwayCommission, 282 N.C. 278, 284, 192 S.E.2d 273, 277 (1972).

3. To establish a claim for negligence, plaintiffs must show the following: (a) Ms. Bolden failed to exercise due care in the performance of some legal duty owed to Mr. Robinson; and (b) the breach of that duty was the proximate cause of Mr. Robinson's injury. Bolkhir v. N.C. StateUniversity, 321 N.C. 706, 709, 356 S.E.2d 898, 900 (1988).

4. Although the standard of care to which a school bus driver must adhere is that of a reasonably prudent person, the proper degree of care varies according to the particular circumstances. Simmons ex rel Simmonsv. Columbus County Bd. of Educ., 171 N.C. App. 725, 615 S.E. 2d 69 (2005). Based upon the facts of this case, Ms.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Barney v. North Carolina State Highway Commission
192 S.E.2d 273 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1972)
Bolkhir v. North Carolina State University
365 S.E.2d 898 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1988)
Yancey v. Lea
550 S.E.2d 155 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2001)
Simmons Ex Rel. Simmons v. Columbus County Board of Education
615 S.E.2d 69 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2005)
Welch Ex Rel. Johnson v. Jenkins
155 S.E.2d 763 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1967)
Clark v. Roberts
139 S.E.2d 593 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Robinson v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Bd. of Edu., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-charlotte-mecklenburg-bd-of-edu-ncworkcompcom-2007.