Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Edu655 Rose V Boe Mackey
Edu655 Rose V Boe Mackey
General Rule of Law: Transportation Committee finds that the violations of Rules and
Regulations continue to be detrimental to the safety of persons and property on the bus route,
they may after giving written notice to the parents of the bus riders on the route, without further
vote of the Board of Education, suspend the bus route temporarily commencing not earlier than
five calendar days from the date of notice to the parents. A bus may not be temporarily
suspended for more than five days without a vote of the full Board of Education.
Procedure Summary:
Plaintiffs: Thomas Rose (P), and other resident taxpayers and parents of children
Facts: The Nashua Board of Education provides transportation by bus to its schools for all
elementary students who reside one mile or more from their respective schools, and for all
secondary students who reside two miles or more from their respective schools. Complaints
from drivers of acts of vandalism and the throwing of objects, which the drivers perceived
impinged upon the safety of their operation of the school buses. In December 1978, a proposal
was made to the Board whereby a bus route might be temporarily suspended for disciplinary
purposes. The bus drivers appeared before the Board and outlined disciplinary problems of
“disrespect for driver, excessive noise, throwing of objects such as pencils or acorns, and for
some of the buses, cutting of the seats.” A suspension policy was recommended and was
discussed and approved on October 29, 1979. Interested parents appeared before meetings of the
suspension of routes, seat assignments, photo ID passes, in-bus monitors, and/or cameras.
Holding and Decision: (Memorandum Opinion) Yes. On January 5,1981, the Board adopted a
detailed “transportation handbook,” setting forth the rules and regulations governing the conduct
of students on school buses. In order for proper disciplinary actions, a report of the violation
should be reported to the Board of Education. The transportation committee was to meet and
consider the ruling and make a decision. Student safety and accountability become a priority
while bus drivers could focus on their routes. No constitutional rights of plaintiffs have been
infringed by the actions of the defendants, we consider that no mandate should issue from this
court. Judgment is accordingly ordered for the defendants on all counts of the complaint.
Affirmed.
Comment: The plaintiffs herein requires the Court to consider the factors of significance threat
of irreparable harm to plaintiffs if not granted and the balance between such harm and injury.
Also, the probability of success on the merits and the public interest. It is clear that the plaintiffs
harm would be minimal compared to the danger to safe operation of school buses and the
Reference
Rose v. Nashua BD. Of ED. (n.d.). Leagle. Retrieved February 25, 2018, from
https://www.leagle.com/decision/19811872506fsupp136611704