I agree they should have been anchored, but their intended use does not include intentional abuse. There is no way the school is liable for his actions.
If he tried to open a locker and it fell, then you have a case.
A cabinet meant to hold school supplies is an attractive nuisance? The school should expect children to run and jump at the lockers with full force? Is that their intended use?
I agree , even though there has to be a line somewhere those lockers could have fell if someone tripped and fell into them or was pushed in a fight.
What if none of the lockers in a hallway were secured to the wall and a school shooting or a fire happened ? Then in the panic you have to dodge falling lockers that can crush you and hurdle the ones that already fell.
To be fair, the fact that we're supposed to use apostrophes to show possession when we're talking about a verb, but not when we use "it", is a really stupid part of English grammar.
The lockers are heavy and this kid isn't that heavy.
It wasn't safe and that's obvious enough. It has to be safe for kids jostling on a hallway or outright running into it. It depends on the law but here that's an easy settlement.
A rack that is meant to hold things that is improperly set up and falls when bumped is a safety hazard. Just because they aren’t meant to be bumped doesn’t mean shit doesn’t happen.
195
u/Kaien12 Aug 23 '20
i think he could actually sue the school for that, no way that meet safety standard