Shaw v. Park Hill R-V School District

630 S.W.2d 610, 3 Educ. L. Rep. 793, 1982 Mo. App. LEXIS 2839
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedMarch 9, 1982
DocketNo. WD 32367
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 630 S.W.2d 610 (Shaw v. Park Hill R-V School District) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shaw v. Park Hill R-V School District, 630 S.W.2d 610, 3 Educ. L. Rep. 793, 1982 Mo. App. LEXIS 2839 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982).

Opinion

TURNAGE, Judge.

Susan Shaw appeals the denial of her petition for relief against a ten-day school suspension levied by Park Hill R-V School District in October, 1980.

In her statement of facts Susan states that she was a senior in October, 1980, when she was given a ten-day suspension from school. On November 3, 1980, she filed a petition in the circuit court seeking an immediate restraining order against her suspension, a temporary injunction and a permanent injunction. The court denied all relief.

In its brief in this court Park Hill states that Susan was graduated from Park Hill High School in May, 1981. Susan does not make any denial of this statement.

This court may notice facts outside the record to determine whether or not the issue presented is moot. Brooks v. Club Exchange Corporation, 356 S.W.2d 555, 557[1,2] (Mo.App.1962). Here, Susan states she was a senior in October, 1980, and Park Hill states that she was graduated in May, 1981. These two statements are consistent and absent a denial by Susan, this court finds that Susan is no longer a student at Park Hill.

The only relief sought in the petition was temporary and permanent injunctions against the suspension. The suspension has long since expired, and, in fact, Susan states in her statement of facts that she returned to school after the suspension. The real complaint now is that she was permanently suspended as a cheerleader. Obviously, if she is not a student, she is not now affected by that action.

At this time there is no practical or enforceable consequences of the suspension because Susan is no longer a student at Park Hill. The case has, therefore, become moot. State ex rel. Glendinning, Etc. v. Letz, 591 S.W.2d 92, 95[1] (Mo.App.1979).

The appeal is dismissed.

All concur.

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

Related

Asher v. Carnahan
268 S.W.3d 427 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2008)
Consolidated School District Number 2 v. King Ex Rel. Dresselhaus
786 S.W.2d 217 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1990)
Leuellyn v. Director of Revenue
782 S.W.2d 724 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
630 S.W.2d 610, 3 Educ. L. Rep. 793, 1982 Mo. App. LEXIS 2839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shaw-v-park-hill-r-v-school-district-moctapp-1982.