# Doe v. Claiborne County ex rel. Claiborne County Board of Education

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · December 26, 1996 · 103 F.3d 495

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6943976

## Case

- **Full name:** Jane DOE and Janet Doe, Individually v. CLAIBORNE COUNTY, TENNESSEE, by and through the CLAIBORNE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION and Dennis L. Peters Roy L. Norris Charles Randall Burchette Bobby Williams Dr. Roy Ellis, Jr. J.P. Barnard Lynn S. Barnard in their individual and official capacities and Sam Widener Don Dobbs, and James Leonard Bundren, in their official capacities only
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** December 26, 1996
- **Citations:** 103 F.3d 495
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Norris
- **Judges:** Krupansky, Norris, Ryan
- **Cited by:** 87 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6943976

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that 18 students’ “right to be free from sexual abuse at the hands of a public school teacher is clearly protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment”
- stating that students’ “right to be free from sexual abuse at the hands of a public school teacher is clearly protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment”
- finding a substantive due process violation against a school teacher when the teacher sexually harassed and raped a minor student

## Opinion text

ALAN E. NORRIS, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part, dissenting in part.
I respectfully dissent from the holding found in Part II of the majority opinion, that plaintiff enjoyed a clearly established fundamental substantive due process right “to personal security and to bodily integrity.” I question the wisdom of the majority in placing this court on record as saying that commission of a state law sexual assault crime amounts to a constitutional tort under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Furthermore, that holding runs contrary to this court’s discussion of the question in United States v. Lanier, 73 F.3d 1380, 1388-89 (6th Cir.1996) (en banc).
It follows, then, that I concur in Parts II and III of the opinion to the extent that the majority affirms the dismissal of claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 .,
I concur in the balance of the opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6943976. Public record. Not legal advice.