SHurd Legal Memorandum Sample

1. MEMORANDUM
To: Lucy Legal, Supervising Attorney
From: Sandy Hurd, Paralegal
Date: 6/24/2015
Re: Perspective Client, Scott & Vincent Siegel, Merry Go Round Accident
Per your request, here is the rundown of the interview with Scott & his father, Vincent
Siegel, who came into the office on Wed. 6/22/2015 to give their side of the story of how Scott
broke his leg on school property, with only one teacher supervising 40 students at one time.
ISSUE:
Scott Siegel, (minor child) had broken his leg when he had fallen off the Merry Go
Round, which in turn Scott’s father Vincent Siegel would like to bring a lawsuit of negligence
against the Delaware Board of Education, for lack of supervision while his son was on the
playground during recess.
FACTS:
Scott Siegel is a 9 year old male who in fact does reside in the Delaware public school
district. On the day in question Scott was spinning on the Merry Go Round with his classmates,
the children were going pretty fast, as they usually do when they play on the merry go round
during recess. There were 10 children in total on the said merry go round, one (1) student being
Scott’s best friend Julian Smith. All said children did not get severely hurt, but some received
bumps and bruises. Scott in fact was hurt the worst, receiving a broken leg. Scott explained he
did not hear the teacher and that his foot had in fact got stuck under the merry go round, causing

2. him to fall off the said merry go round. The Siegel’s were called and took Scott to his PCP, from
there was referred to the ER since the leg was broken. Scott missed one (1) month of school so
far, and was able to make all said work from each class he missed while being out of school. He
still wears his cast, having 2 or 3 weeks left till the Doctor will remove said cast, this will in fact
show if Scott needs physical therapy or any surgeries to said broken leg. The father, Vincent
Siegel, expressed the school had 40 students to one teacher while on the playground during
recess, expressing that this was in fact not enough supervision for 40 3
rd
graders. He also
expressed Scott is a typical 9 year old with typical average behaviors for a 9 year old boy. Mr.
Siegel, expressed the Principle did apologize, but did not say there was any negligence at the
time of the accident. The teacher that was on duty Mr. Rafter, had sent an email to see how Scott
was recovering. There are no Police reports, however there may be a school accident report, and
camera surveillance, and Mr. Siegel expressed he wasn’t aware of any cameras on the school
property. Mr. Siegel, would like to know if he has a case against the Delaware Board of
Education for lack of supervision while his son was on the school playground during recess,
when Scott broke his leg.
EVALUATION OF CLIENT
Mr. Siegel and his son Scott Siegel, were very polite and did not hesitate to tell their sides
of the story. Scott being a 9 year old minor, spoke very clear and seemed very distraught that his
summer vacation was ruined, since now he was unable to go swimming or bike riding with his
friends, due to the cast on his leg. Mr. Siegel feels the school is in the wrong by having only one
teacher per 40 students during recess. Mr. Siegel, would like to sue the school for damages, such
as medical bills, future medical bills, his and wife’s wages from their jobs since they had to take
turns with days off to care for their son Scott.

3. FUTHER RESEARCH NEEDED
In ordered to properly represent Mr. Siegel and his son Scott, we would need to check to
see if there is an accident report at the school, talk with the supervising teacher at the time of the
accident, talk with the witnesses, collect all said medical records and bills, research the laws and
statutes on negligence on school property, such as, will the teacher have immunity to this
situation, and what is the teacher student ratio while in class and on the playground. Whether the
school or the teacher are in fact liable for Scott’s broken leg from the said merry go round.
Before Vincent and Scott Siegel came into our office there was research done. The research
yielded conflicting information of who is liable. Delaware comparative law will not work here,
since Scott had taken for granted of the risk that came with going to fast on the said merry go
round (Del. Code. Ann. tit. 10, 8132 (West), 2015). The research also yielded the teacher student
ratio is not to exceed 22 students per teacher, this being for Kindergarten through third grade,
however the district can sign a waiver form to allow more students per teacher if needed (DEL
CODE § 1705A : Delaware Code - Section 1705A: MAXIMUM STUDENT-INSTRUCTOR
RATIO REQUIREMENTS - , 2008). There is a case on the books, that is similar to this case,
and the teacher was found not to be negligent, Banks v. Terrebonne Parish School Board, this
teacher had in fact told the children to stop the behavior and was busy picking up gym gear when
the child was hurt. The La Appeals Court had in fact said the teacher was not negligent, since he
was one person and could not at one and all the same time observe all actions of the students
when the minor child Banks was injured (Banks v. Terrebonne Parish School Board, 1976).
RECOMMENDATIONS

4. My feelings on this case are the Delaware Board of Education and Mr. Rafter the
supervising teacher, are not liable for Scott Siegel’s broken leg. The teacher did his job, however
the children did not listen and the accident happened, with this being said, the accident would
have happened with the teacher right there or not, Scott’s leg had in fact gotten stuck under the
merry go round. Can we ask if the merry go round did not have enough room under it, was there
a malfunction of the said merry go round, possibility? Could it be the merry go round was
faulty, since it had tossed a few children off, as Scott’s leg got caught under the merry go round?
I feel there are many unanswered questions, which in turn I believe once there is more discovery
introduced to this case, from there we would have a better idea if this case was Scott’s fault or if
in fact the Delaware Board of Education, and Mr. Rafter are liable for the damages that Mr.
Siegel are asking for in the lawsuit.

5. References
Banks v. Terrebonne Parish School Board, 339 So.2d 1295 (La. App. Nov. 15, 1976).
DEL CODE § 1705A : Delaware Code - Section 1705A: MAXIMUM STUDENT-INSTRUCTOR RATIO
REQUIREMENTS - . (2008, July 16). Retrieved from State of Delaware:
http://delcode.delaware.gov/title14/c017/index.shtml
Del. Code. Ann. tit. 10, 8132 (West). (2015).