339.240 Rules
of student conduct, discipline and rights; duties of state board and district
school boards. (1)
The State Board of Education in accordance with ORS chapter 183 shall adopt
rules setting minimum standards for pupil conduct and discipline and for rights
and procedures pertaining thereto that are consistent with orderly operation of
the educational processes and with fair hearing requirements. The rules shall
be distributed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction to all school
districts.
(2) Every
district school board shall adopt and attempt to give the widest possible
distribution of copies of reasonable written rules regarding pupil conduct,
discipline and rights and procedures pertaining thereto. Such rules must comply
with minimum standards adopted by the State Board of Education under subsection
(1) of this section.
(3) Every
district school board shall enforce consistently and fairly its written rules
regarding pupil conduct, discipline and rights. This subsection does not apply
to a pupil who is eligible for special education as a child with a disability
under ORS 343.035. [1971 c.561 §§2,3; 1993 c.45 §123; 1999 c.726 §1; 2007 c.70 §97]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases, 1973–2001 · leading case:
Neuhaus v. Federico, 505 P.2d 939 (Or. Ct. App. 1973).
Neuhaus v. Federico, 505 P.2d 939 (Or. Ct. App. 1973).
· cites it 14× “" ORS 339.240. "(1) Public school pupils shall comply with rules for the government of such schools, pursue the prescribed course of study, use the prescribed textbooks and submit to the teachers' authority.”
Sutherlin Educ. Ass'n v. Sutherlin Sch. Dist. No. 130, 548 P.2d 204 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
· cites it 2× “240(2) to adopt disciplinary rules consistent with the rules promulgated by the State Board of Education, ORS 339.240(1), it is not required to bargain over the three parts of this subject.”
Wilson v. Chancellor, 418 F. Supp. 1358 (D. Or. 1976).
“Plaintiffs do not contend that the order fails to comply with ORS 339.240, which requires that district school boards “attempt to give the widest possible distribution of reasonable written rules regarding pupil conduct, discipline, and rights and procedures pertaining thereto.”
Ferguson ex rel. Ferguson v. Phoenix-Talent Sch. Dist. 4, 19 P.3d 943 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 11× “The principal theory that he advances in this court is that the district had adopted disciplinary rules pursuant to ORS 339.240, that those rules comprehensively define the sanctions for various misconduct including drug infractions, that specific provisions of the rules that…”
Randol v. Newberg Pub. Sch. Bd., 542 P.2d 938 (Or. Ct. App. 1975).
“review denied (1973), we interpreted ORS 339.240, 339.250 and 332.107 together to mean "* * * that a school board's authority to enact rules governing student conduct is limited to enacting rules that have some reasonable connection with the educational process.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 339.240(1) — 2 cases
Neuhaus v. Federico, 505 P.2d 939 (Or. Ct. App. 1973).
“" ORS 339.240. "(1) Public school pupils shall comply with rules for the government of such schools, pursue the prescribed course of study, use the prescribed textbooks and submit to the teachers' authority.”
Sutherlin Educ. Ass'n v. Sutherlin Sch. Dist. No. 130, 548 P.2d 204 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
“240(2) to adopt disciplinary rules consistent with the rules promulgated by the State Board of Education, ORS 339.240(1), it is not required to bargain over the three parts of this subject.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 339.240(2) — 1 case
Sutherlin Educ. Ass'n v. Sutherlin Sch. Dist. No. 130, 548 P.2d 204 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
“240(2) to adopt disciplinary rules consistent with the rules promulgated by the State Board of Education, ORS 339.240(1), it is not required to bargain over the three parts of this subject.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 339.240(3) — 1 case
Ferguson ex rel. Ferguson v. Phoenix-Talent Sch. Dist. 4, 19 P.3d 943 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
“The principal theory that he advances in this court is that the district had adopted disciplinary rules pursuant to ORS 339.240, that those rules comprehensively define the sanctions for various misconduct including drug infractions, that specific provisions of the rules that…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.