Search results
13 lis 2006 · In L.W. v. Toms River Regional Schools Board of Education, 189 N.J. 381, 915 A.2d 535 (2007), we explicitly extended the Lehmann test to claims of hostile school environment sexual harassment brought against schools as places of public accommodation under N.J.S.A. 10:5-12(f).
school district is not compelled to purge its schools of all peer harassment to avoid liability. Rather, schools are required to implement effective preventative and remedial measures to curb severe or pervasive discriminatory mistreatment.
20 mar 2007 · On February 21, 2007, the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously held in L.W. v. Toms River Reg’l Sch. Bd. of Educ., A-111-05 (February 21, 2007), that a cause of action by a student against a school district for student-on-student affectional or sexual orientation harassment exists under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“LAD ...
3 paź 2005 · The Toms River Regional Schools Board of Education (school district or district) appeals from a final determination of the Director of the Division on Civil Rights (Director) finding that the district violated the Law Against Discrimination (LAD), N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 to -49, because complainant L.W. was subjected to discrimination and harassment by ...
5 mar 2005 · On February 21, 2007, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued its decision in the landmark bullying case, L.W. v. Toms River Regional Schools Board of Education. The Education Law Center appeared as a “friend of the court” in the case, and filed a brief with other advocacy groups.
22 lut 2007 · The LAD recognizes a cause of action against a school district for student-on-student affectional or sexual orientation harassment.
decision in the landmark case L.W. ex rel. L.G. v. Toms River Regional Schools Board of Education,these protections are appli-cable to New Jersey’s public educational institutions.2 The L.W. Court recognized that it is the responsibility of school districts to take effective steps to end harassment and bullying
