TexasCHLforum.com

...there was a time when people remembered that it's OUR city and OUR hall...and TOGETHER went there and got things changed when necessary...back when politicians worked for US, instead of our working for THEM....

She should sue the school for $1.25 to cover her losses

CrimsonSoul wrote:She should sue the school for $1.25 to cover her losses

Might be able to there possibly.
IIRC, Texas public schools pretty much enjoy sovereign immunity except in cases involving vehicular accidents or gross negligence. So a suit could be filed, but they'd plead immunity in their answer attached to a motion for summary judgement/motion to dismiss, and you'd need to plead and prove that they weren't immune under some exception.
And, in all likelihood with "loser pays" you'd end up paying the school's court costs.... in addition to buying the unnecessary lunch, and her own costs for service of process (and an attorney possibly, unless one fresh out of school doesn't know about the Texas Tort Claims Act and takes it on contingency so he can learn not to do that again.)

RPB wrote:

CrimsonSoul wrote:She should sue the school for $1.25 to cover her losses

Might be able to there possibly.
IIRC, Texas public schools pretty much enjoy sovereign immunity except in cases involving vehicular accidents or gross negligence. So a suit could be filed, but they'd plead immunity in their answer attached to a motion for summary judgement/motion to dismiss, and you'd need to plead and prove that they weren't immune under some exception.
And, in all likelihood with "loser pays" you'd end up paying the school's court costs.... in addition to buying the unnecessary lunch, and her own costs for service of process (and an attorney possibly, unless one fresh out of school doesn't know about the Texas Tort Claims Act and takes it on contingency so he can learn not to do that again.)

This seems like gross negligence to me

American Cheese, processed 1 ounce .5 Grams Carbs, 9 Grams of Fat 106 Calories
Turkey breast, processed 1 ounce 0 Grams Carbs, 2 Grams fat, 51 Calories
Breads, all types, regular sliced 1 slice (1 ounce) 13 grams Carbs, 1 Gram Fat, 60 to 80 Calories (x2)
Banana 1 medium, 26.7 grams Carbs, .6 grams fat, 105 calories
Apple juice unsweetened, 6 ounces, 21.7 grams carbs, 0 grams fat, 87 calories

Total about 62 grams carbs, 12.6 grams fat, 490 calories

School lunch if they ate ONLY the chicken nuggets 7.5 Grams carbs, 10 grams of fat, 160 calories. Not to mention there are saturated fats in the fried nuggets as well as higher cholesterol.

shamelessly stolen from someone and I didn't want to quote it.

What do mothers know about raising kids? That is better left to the State don't ya know. Come to think of it, between getting Quaker Oats for breakfast 7 days a week and PB&Js at least 5 days a week for lunch, I amazed I survived to adulthood. Good thing the government got involved.

Oldgringo wrote:

RoyGBiv wrote:....The worst part is that we're talking about Southeast North Carolina.
This would be no surprise in Kali, but in the land of Pork BBQ in vinegar sauce, this is astounding.
If that lunch is bad for you, I'd be dead by now.

If it wasn't so far and the cost of diesel so high, I'd go find me a Smithfields right now. Boy Howdy, I missed that pulled pork BBQ in vinegar sauce {*sigh*}.

Next time you plan to be in the FTW area give me a shout and I'll put a Boston Butt on the smoker. I buy Scott's sauce by the case, in case we get company. All the comforts of home.

karder wrote:What do mothers know about raising kids? That is better left to the State don't ya know. Come to think of it, between getting Quaker Oats for breakfast 7 days a week and PB&Js at least 5 days a week for lunch, I amazed I survived to adulthood. Good thing the government got involved.

"It takes a village to raise a child."

...it would have turned out better for us all if at least ONE child had been cooked and eaten by a neighboring village...

It takes a child to raze a village.

chasfm11 wrote:

Heartland Patriot wrote:I'm going to ask a VERY simple question with a not so simple answer: how long are folks going to put up with this sort of malarkey? Each incident that is acquiesced to begets more incidents...each one tells the "wise and learned elites" that they got away with it and they can get away with more.

I have been waiting for the public meltdown over running attractive women through the nudie scanner multiple times, feeling up octogenarians with certifiable medical conditions and frisking little girls under 6 - and it has not yet happened. Apparently, too many people of turned absolutely gutless.

I would be in the process of methodically tearing the entire school administration apart, meeting by meeting if our 8 year old granddaughter had been involved in such a matter. I have a lot more time than they do and they would end up changing before I gave up.

I think it's more that people are indifferent than gutless. Most of this stuff simply doesn't affect most people, or it doesn't affect them enough to bear the cost of opposition. This Nanny State stuff advances because the incremental costs imposed are far less than the cost of opposition. In this case, what can the parents do? Go to the media? Useless because most people aren't affected and don't care, and the Nanny Stater's are true believers and aren't going to change unless they have to. Go to the school? Might work, but if the school just blows them off, the only recourse is to go to court, which is expensive, and may still yield an unacceptable outcome. Short of having the money to send your child to private school, that pretty much leaves homeschooling as the only option for avoidance, and most people can't, or won't, expend the effort to homeschool.

People aren't going to react until the cost imposed on them is equal to or greater than the cost of opposition (in whatever form...litigation, protest, fear of arrest, etc.).

VMI77 wrote: I think it's more that people are indifferent than gutless. Most of this stuff simply doesn't affect most people, or it doesn't affect them enough to bear the cost of opposition. This Nanny State stuff advances because the incremental costs imposed are far less than the cost of opposition. In this case, what can the parents do? Go to the media? Useless because most people aren't affected and don't care, and the Nanny Stater's are true believers and aren't going to change unless they have to. Go to the school? Might work, but if the school just blows them off, the only recourse is to go to court, which is expensive, and may still yield an unacceptable outcome. Short of having the money to send your child to private school, that pretty much leaves homeschooling as the only option for avoidance, and most people can't, or won't, expend the effort to homeschool.

People aren't going to react until the cost imposed on them is equal to or greater than the cost of opposition (in whatever form...litigation, protest, fear of arrest, etc.).

I would agree that opposition through the school would be difficult but let's look at some of the possible points.
1. The school has denied that someone was there from outside of the school looking through the lunches. I would calmly persist until I was given the name of the school official who ordered the lunch for my child. SOMEONE has to have done that. I won't stop until I had the person's name.
2. Schools do have a chain of command. If it was the principal of the school (according to the stories, that who has taken responsibility), the next step is the assistant superintendent or the superintendent. The question would be "under what authority did you search my child's lunch box." I suspect that if you started putting that kind of pressure on, the school would rollover and identify the outside person involved. Then next question is "under what authority was that person in the school and given access to my child's lunch?" There has to be some legal reason for them to be there in the form of a State or Federal law. I suspect that there is no such law. If the augment reverted to a "policy", I'd demand to see that written policy.

I admit that this would be a step by step, inch by inch effort and that at not time could you risk loosing your temper, not matter how much stone-walling you run into. The basis for persistence is that "I need to understand the specific reasons behind what happened to my child so that it doesn't happen again." No one can deny you under that condition, as long as you are willing to persist.

In my other life, I have a lance and take on windmills on the weekends