Preview:

In the Circu it Court for M ontgom ery County Case No. 222848V IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 11 September Term, 2004 ______________________________________

MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION v.

HORACE MANN INSURANCE COMPANY

______________________________________ Bell, C.J. Raker Wilner Cathell Harrell Battaglia Eldridge, John C. (Retired, specially assigned), JJ. ______________________________________ Opinion by Wilner, J. ______________________________________ Filed: November 10, 2004

The Circuit Co urt for M ontgom ery County dete rmined tha t the Mon tgomery Co unty Board of Education was required by law to defend one o f its teachers ag ainst a tort claim filed by a former student and that it was liable to the private insurance company that ultimately provided that defense for having declined to do so. Th e Court of Special A ppeals affirmed the declaratory and mone tary judgment against the board ( Board of Education v. Mann , 154 Md. App. 502, 840 A.2d 220 (2003)), and we granted cross-petitions for certiorari to review those decisions. We shall affirm the judgment of the Court of Special Appeals.

BACKGROUIND In February, 1998, a former student in the Montgomery County school system, using the name John Doe, filed suit in U .S. District Court against the county school board, the principal (or former principal) of Wood Middle School, and Barbara Robbins, a teacher (or former teacher) at that school. The essence of th e complaint was that, while a student at Wood from 1989 to 1993, Doe, then a pre-teen, was in a mentoring program in which Ms. Robbins acted as his mentor and that Ms. Robbin s abused h er professio nal relationsh ip with him in a variety of ways, including her engagement in a sexual relationship with him.1 We

The me ntoring pro gram w as adopted to "assist young sters from a diverse ethn ic and socio-economic background with academic support" and to improve communications skills. The program w as geared toward "at risk" students, i.e., students who w ere experiencing both academic and behavioral problems. A descrip tion of the p rogram co ntained in th e record ex plains that a m entor is expected to "spend time to teach, challenge, and support" the student. The program set (contin ued...)

1

are concerned here only with the action against Ms. Robbins. The com plain t alleged, in pr elim inary paragraphs applicable to all of the claims against Ms. Robbins, that in the course of more than three years, she "repeatedly, sexually abused Doe by having vaginal and other forms of sex with him" and that she "abused her special relationship with Doe in numerous, inappropriate ways." Doe complained, "[m ]ore specifically," that she called him, bought him gifts, sent food to his hom e, invited him into the bedrooms and other rooms of her home, sent him love cards, wrote him love letters, provided him with transportation, and fr equently had vaginal an d other for ms of sex with him. He add ed that Robbins "intentionally and inapprop riately interfered w ith his parents and guardians by inappropriately blending and confusing the roles of mentor, teacher, lover, friend and parent" and that, as a result of her wrongful acts, Doe suffered severe mental and emotional distress and economic and psychic damage. Maryland Code,

Download Board of Ed v. Mann Insurance.pdf

Maryland Law