Education Law UpdateNovember 21, 2013By Jack P. Lipton, Ph.D., Esq.

School District and MandatedReporter Can Be Held Liable forImproper Disclosure of Report ofSuspected Child Abuse In a published decision issued in November2013, the California Court of Appeal ruled that amandated reporter employed by a schooldistrict, and the school district itself, can beheld liable for improper disclosure of a report ofsuspected child abuse. In the case of Cuff v. Grossmont Union HighSchool District, et al., the two sons of PlaintiffTina Cuff met with Susan Saunders, a schoolcounselor employed at Grossmont Union HighSchool District. The boys told Ms. Saundersthat they were being verbally and physicallyabused by their mother, Tina Cuff. As a matter of law, Ms. Saunders is a"mandated reporter" under the Child Abuse andNeglect Reporting Act which means that shehad a legal obligation to report any suspectedchild abuse or neglect. Accordingly, Ms.Saunders prepared a Suspected Child AbuseReport which she duly faxed to San DiegoCounty Child Welfare Services. The problem arose, though, when Ms. Saundersmade a copy of the Suspected Child AbuseReport and gave it to Ms. Cuff's ex-husband,the father of the two boys. Ms. Saunders toldthe father to take the Report to the police sothat the police could take appropriate action. The father, based on the Report, instead wentto court seeking custody of his sons. After ahearing, the court ruled that Ms. Cuff wouldretain sole legal and physical custody of theboys.

Jack P. Lipton, Ph.D., Esq. 800.333.4297

jlipton@bw slaw .com

Jack P. Lipton is a Senior Partner in

our law firm's Education Law

Practice Group. Dr. Lipton also has

a Ph.D. in Psychology and provides

training in child abuse and neglect

reporting, and he is an adjunct

faculty member at the Graduate

School of Education and

Psychology at Pepperdine

University and at Southw estern

Law School.

Based on Ms. Saunders' improper disclosure ofthe Report to Ms. Cuff's ex-husband, Ms. Cufffiled a lawsuit against Saunders and theGrossmont Union High School District in SanDiego Superior Court alleging invasion ofprivacy. The Superior Court granted theDefendants' Motion for Summary Judgment anddismissed Ms. Cuff's case on the grounds thatMs. Saunders and the District are immune fromliability under the Child Abuse and NeglectReporting Act. On appeal, the Court of Appeal reversed, rulingthat Ms. Saunders and the District are notimmune from liability. The Court of Appeal needed to reconcile twostatutes within the Child Abuse and NeglectReporting Act: Under Penal Code Section11167.5, reports of child abuse or neglect areconfidential and may be disclosed only asrequired by law. But Penal Code Section11172(a) does not apply when a mandatedreporter discloses a Report in violation of theconfidentiality requirement in Penal CodeSection 11167.5, and thus, that Ms. Saundersand the District were not immune and could beheld liable for the improper disclosure of theReport to Ms. Cuff's ex-husband. The Court of Appeal also rejected the District'sarguments that the Report was a "pupil record"within the meaning of Education Code Section49061 and that the father was entitled to acopy of the Report as a pupil record. The primary lesson from the Cuff case is thatalthough mandated reporters file a SuspectedChild Abuse Report whenever there is knowledgeor a reasonable suspicion of child abuse orneglect, mandated reporters also must bediligent in not disclosing the Report to anyoneother than the proper authorities. From a riskmanagement perspective, the importance ofstrict confidentiality of such Reports should beemphasized to all mandated reporters. Althoughthe Penal Code generally provides immunity forindividuals reporting child abuse based onknowledge or reasonable suspicion of abuse,this immunity does not protect disclosing aconfidential report to an unauthorized person.

Education Law

Public Law

Labor & Employment Law

Litigation

Real Estate & Business Law

Law Offices ThroughoutCalifornia

800.333.4297www.bwslaw.com