A. No teacher, principal or other person employed by a school board or employed in a school operated by the Commonwealth shall subject a student to corporal punishment. This prohibition of corporal punishment shall not be deemed to prevent (i) the use of incidental, minor or reasonable physical contact or other actions designed to maintain order and control; (ii) the use of reasonable and necessary force to quell a disturbance or remove a student from the scene of a disturbance which threatens physical injury to persons or damage to property; (iii) the use of reasonable and necessary force to prevent a student from inflicting physical harm on himself; (iv) the use of reasonable and necessary force for self-defense or the defense of others; or (v) the use of reasonable and necessary force to obtain possession of weapons or other dangerous objects or controlled substances or paraphernalia which are upon the person of the student or within his control.
B. In determining whether a person was acting within the exceptions provided in this section, due deference shall be given to reasonable judgments at the time of the event which were made by a teacher, principal or other person employed by a school board or employed in a school operated by the Commonwealth.
C. For the purposes of this section, "corporal punishment" means the infliction of, or causing the infliction of, physical pain on a student as a means of discipline.
This definition shall not include physical pain, injury or discomfort caused by the use of incidental, minor or reasonable physical contact or other actions designed to maintain order and control as permitted in subdivision (i) of subsection A of this section or the use of reasonable and necessary force as permitted by subdivisions (ii), (iii), (iv), and (v) of subsection A of this section, or by participation in practice or competition in an interscholastic sport, or participation in physical education or an extracurricular activity.
1989, c. 287; 1995, c. 681.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases, 1999–2015 · leading case:
Mulvey v. Jones, 587 S.E.2d 728 (Va. Ct. App. 2003).
Mulvey v. Jones, 587 S.E.2d 728 (Va. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 35× “The appellant maintains Code § 22.1-279.1 [1] authorized his conduct because he intended to maintain control and prevent the student from harming himself or others.”
Brown Ex Rel. Brown v. Ramsey, 121 F. Supp. 2d 911 (E.D. Va. 2000).
· cites it 4× “C; Va.Code Ann. § 22.1-279.1 (2000). Considering these facts in a light most favorable to Plaintiffs, the Court finds that no reasonable jury could conclude that the force applied by Ramsey and Hart was disproportionate to the need presented under the test enunciated in Hall and…”
Heather Hogston Lambert v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 779 S.E.2d 871 (Va. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 4× “Construing a similar exception in Code § 22.1-279.1, 2 the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia concluded that the language “reflects an express legislative intent to defer to teachers who are often required to make difficult and expedi *690 tious…”
Daily v. Bd. of Educ. of Morrill Sch. Dist., 588 N.W.2d 813 (Neb. 1999).
“§ 20-4-302 (1997); Va.Code Ann. § 22.1-279.1 (Michie 1997). Nebraska statutes do not deal with this issue in the specific context of corporal punishment.”
Daily v. Bd. of Educ., 588 N.W.2d 813 (Neb. 1999).
“§ 20-4-302 (1997); Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-279.1 (Michie 1997).”
— Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-279.1(A) — 1 case
Mulvey v. Jones, 587 S.E.2d 728 (Va. Ct. App. 2003).
“The appellant maintains Code § 22.1-279.1 [1] authorized his conduct because he intended to maintain control and prevent the student from harming himself or others.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 22.1-279.1(C) — 1 case
Mulvey v. Jones, 587 S.E.2d 728 (Va. Ct. App. 2003).
“The appellant maintains Code § 22.1-279.1 [1] authorized his conduct because he intended to maintain control and prevent the student from harming himself or others.”
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.