# McLeod v. Grant County School District No. 128

> Washington Supreme Court · March 25, 1953 · 42 Wash. 2d 316

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9624369

## Case

- **Full name:** Lorraine McLeod, a Minor, by Louise McLeod, Her Guardian Ad Litem, Appellant, v. Grant County School District No. 128, Respondent
- **Court:** Washington Supreme Court
- **Decided:** March 25, 1953
- **Citations:** 42 Wash. 2d 316; 255 P.2d 360; 1953 Wash. LEXIS 447
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Olson
- **Judges:** Olson, Hamley
- **Cited by:** 201 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/9624369

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- declining to preclude proximate cause as a matter of law where alleged negligence was allowing unsupervised students to enter dark, secluded room within school auditorium, where plaintiff was raped by other students who took her to that room
- holding high school had 12 a duty to protect students from rape by other students because the “harm fell within 13 a general field of danger which should have been anticipated”
- holding that a school has a duty to protect students from reasonably anticipated dangers

## Opinion text

Olson, J.
(dissenting)—I cannot subscribe to the view of the majority that the well-pleaded facts or the reasonable inferences from the facts well pleaded in this case require the court to submit to a jury the issue of whether or not the school district reasonably should have anticipated that a darkened room, available to school boys and girls as was this room, might be utilized during periods of unsupervised play for acts of indecency. In this regard, we have before us only the pleader’s conclusion, unsupported by allegations of fact sufficient to sustain it. In my opinion, the trial court was correct in its ruling on the demurrer.
Mallery, Hill, and Donworth, JJ., concur with Olson, J.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9624369. Public record. Not legal advice.