About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


14 Ga. L. Rev. 843 (1979-1980)
The Student-College Relationship and the Duty of Care: Bradshaw v. Rawlings

handle is hein.journals/geolr14 and id is 859 raw text is: The Student-College Relationship and the Duty of Care: Bradshaw v. Rawlings Duty in negligence cases may be defined as a legal obligation which requires conformity to a particular standard of conduct toward another.' The concept of duty has developed in terms of a specific relationship be- tween the plaintiff and the defendant, without which there could be no liability.2 In Bradshaw v. Rawlings3 the Third Circuit concluded that a college owes no duty of protection against injury to its students when the harm. is caused by an intoxicated classmate following a sophomore class picnic for which the college furnished alcoholic beverages. The court's conclusion of no duty under these circumstances, where both college regu- lations and state laws pertaining to legal drinking age were violated, effec- tively forecloses any common law negligence-based right of recovery against the college. Because Pennsylvania's liquor laws have been con- strued as being applicable only to commercial purveyors of alcoholic bev- erages,4 the necessary result of the court's decision is that the college can- not be held responsible under any theory of liability for furnishing the alcoholic beverages, regardless of its lack of care in doing so. I On April 13, 1975 Donald Bradshaw was seriously injured in an auto- mobile accident.5 Bradshaw, an eighteen year old sophomore at Delaware Valley College had attended a college-sponsored class picnic and was re- turning from the event at the time of his injury.6 Because the only availa- ble transportation between the college and the picnic was private automo- bile, Bradshaw had obtained a return ride to the college with Bruce Rawlings, a fellow student.7 While returning, Rawlings lost control of his car and struck a parked vehicle. As a consequence of the collision, Brad- ' W. PROSSER, HANDBOOK OF THE LAW OF ToRs § 53 at 324 (4th ed. 1971): [I1t should be recognized that 'duty' is not sacrosanct in itself, but only an expression of the sum total of those considerations of policy which lead the law to say that the particular plaintiff is n- titled to protection. * Id. at 325. * 612 F.2d 135 (3rd Cir. 1979). * Manning v. Andy, 454 Pa. 237, 310 A.2d 75 (1973) (per curiam). * Bradshaw v. Rawlings, 464 F. Supp. 175, 178 (E.D. Pa. 1979). * 612 F.2d at 137. The picnic took place at a grove on the outskirts of Doylestown, Pennsylvania. 7 Bradshaw v. Rawlings, 464 F. Supp. 175, 178 (E.D. Pa. 1979).