E.I. was a student at El Segundo Middle School during the 2017–2018 school year. She was friends with two other students, Kate and Skyler. E.I told Kate that she liked a boy who Kate had recently dated. Kate told E.I. “no worries.” When Skylar discovered E.I., was talking to Kate’s ex-boyfriend, she sent E.I. social media messages calling her a “b**ch,” “wh**e,” “slut,” “liar,” and “cheater.” She began insulting E.I. at school, sometimes screamed at her, flipped her off, and even slapped her. Teachers witnessed some of these incidents but did not intervene or report it.
E.I. reported the behavior to a school counselor, who arranged a group meeting with E.I. Skylar and Kate on October 20, 2017. The counselor did not prepare for the meeting, did not share the school’s anti-bullying policies, and did not take follow-up steps. Afterward, Skylar’s behavior intensified. On October 24, E.I. emailed the counselor requesting another meeting “as soon as possible.” The counselor met with E.I. but did not investigate or take further steps.
The harassment escalated despite repeated complaints by E.I. and her parents to school officials. E.I. showed the counselor harassing message that Skylar had sent her, the counselor told her “girls will be girls” and “this is just girl drama.” E.I. began eating lunch alone in the nurse’s office and engaging in self-harm.
Throughout the remainder of the school year, Skylar continued bullying E.I. online and in person. In June, the students took a class trip to Knott’s Berry Farm, where Skylar and other students yelled at, taunted, and cursed at E.I. and made her cry. A teacher saw E.I. crying and did not say anything. The following day, students circulated a petition titled “Petition to END [E.I.]’s Life,” which included messages like “KKK” and “she is a whore.” Although the principal suspended the students involved, she did not notify E.I.’s parents and they learned of the petition from another family. The principal later admitted to having “dropped the ball.” Skylar was still permitted to attend the school’s promotion ceremony the next day.
E.I. later transferred out of the District and was diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, and anxiety caused by the bullying. Her psychologist testified that her condition was enduring and would require years of therapy.
In April 2019, E.I. sued the El Segundo Unified School District, alleging negligence under Education Code section 44807 and Government Code sections 815.2, 815.6, 820, and 835. She claimed that District staff failed to protect her from peer bullying and did not follow established safety policies despite repeated complaints. Although she initially asserted a second cause of action for negligent hiring, supervision, and training, she dismissed that claim at trial and proceeded solely on a general negligence theory.
The District argued that its employees’ responses to bullying reports involved discretionary decisions protected by Government Code section 820.2. It argued that decisions about how to address student misconduct and whether to intervene or investigate involved professional judgment insulated from liability.
The jury found the District negligent and awarded E.I. $1 million in noneconomic damages, $700,000 for past and $300,000 for future harms. The trial court denied the District’s motions for a new trial and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The District appealed.
The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s decision. It rejected the District’s argument that E.I. had relied on Education Code sections 48900 et seq., which deal with suspension and expulsion procedures, to create a duty of care. The Court of Appeal explained that E.I. did not base her claim on those statutes or argue they created a private right of action. Instead, her negligence claim rested on a duty recognized under common law and Education Code section 44807 to supervise students and protect them from foreseeable harm. The Court of Appeal reaffirmed that this duty includes protecting students from other students.
The Court of Appeal also held that the District was not entitled to immunity under Government Code section 820.2. That statute shields only basic policy decisions, not routine decisions made in implementing existing policy. The Court of Appeal found that staff did not make policy choices but simply failed to follow established safety procedures, such as investigating bullying reports, notifying parents, and offering support to students. Because these duties were already set out in the District’s and school’s safety plans, failing to carry them out did not qualify as protected discretion.
Finally, the Court of Appeal held that substantial evidence supported the jury’s verdict. E.I. testified that she repeatedly reported the bullying but the school ignored her. Her psychologist linked her PTSD and depression to the school’s failure to act. The Court of Appeal also found that the District waived its challenge to causation by failing to address key evidence in its opening brief. The Court of Appeal held that all other alleged errors were either harmless and forfeited. The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s judgment and upheld the $1 million damages award in favor of E.I.
E.I. v. El Segundo Unified School Dist. (June 13, 2025, No. B325733) ___Cal.App.5th___.