Donald R. Gardner, Jr. vs. School Committee of the Town of Cumberland (March, 1971)

---

Synopsis

Donald R. Gardner, Jr. appealed for an opinion on a directive of the Cumberland School Committee which denied his daughter the right to wear a maxi-coat to an elementary school in the town. Acting on the advice of academic administration in the town, the School Committee had determined that maxi-coats were hazardous for young children to wear to school and, accordingly, had prohibited their use. The appellant contended that the School Committee had no authority to issue a directive regarding a student’s wearing apparel in the public schools. In his decision the Commissioner held that since no evidence was available to show that wearing a maxi-coat constituted a safety hazard, this argument should be ignored. In upholding Gardner's appeal, Commissioner Robinson further maintained that only very unusual circumstances should justify a school committee’s intervention in the matter of a student's mode of dress.

Decision

This matter was heard on August 28 and November 5, 1970 upon the appeal to the Commissioner of Education of Donald R. Gardner, Jr., the father of a student in the Cumberland school system, from (1) a decision of the School Committee of the Town of Cumberland holding the decision of a school principal prohibiting the appellant’s daughter from wearing a maxi-coat at school and (2) a decision of said School Committee prohibiting all children from wearing maxi-coats at all of the elementary schools of Cumberland.

The Commissioner of Education has jurisdiction to hear the appeal by virtue of the provisions of Chapter 16-39 of the General Laws of Rhode Island, 1956, as Amended. Inasmuch as the office of Commissioner of Education under the Board of Regents for Education was vacant at the time of this appeal, the appeal was heard by the former Commissioner of Education under the State Board of Education, now the Director of the State Agency for Elementary and Secondary Education, serving as Acting Commissioner of Education with authority to hear such appeal by virtue of the action of the Board of Regents for Education taken at is meeting on June 25, 1970.

Due notice was given to the interested parties of the time and place of the hearing. Both parties were represented by counsel. Testimony was taken, a transcript of which was made and evidence was provided.

The respondent moved that the Acting Commissioner disqualify himself from hearing the appeal because the appellant is an employee of the State Agency for Elementary and Secondary Education (an agency over which the Acting Commissioner has jurisdiction) and because of the relationship the appellant has with the Acting Commissioner by virtue of his position in the Agency as compared to that which other parties to the appeal have with the Acting Commissioner. The Commissioner did not find this to be cause to grant the motion to disqualify himself and thus denied the motion.

We hold with the appellant that neither school administrators nor school committees have authority by law of by the constitution to determine the mode of dress of pupils unless a clear and present danger to the student's health and safety, causes an interference with school work, or creates classroom or school disorder. . No evidence was presented nor testimony given to indicate that the maxi-coat constituted a clear and present danger to the student’s health and safety other than the opinion of the school principal and his colleagues in the Cumberland Association of School Administrators, and no charge was made that the maxi-coat caused an interference with school work or created classroom or school disorder.

The appeal is sustained.