The Chronicle of Higher Education
News Blog
In the Comments

"We'd like to think that doctors are somehow immune to the influence of advertising, but turns out they're human after all.
— Debbie C

Drug-Company Association Bans Freebies for Doctors

Recent Posts

Bible Professor Will Leave Seminary Instead of Facing Hearing

Purdue U. Scientist Appeals Findings of Research Misconduct

Embattled Congressman Calls for Investigation Into His Actions on Behalf of CCNY

Baylor U. Regents Fire President, Citing Failure to Unite Campus

U. of Texas Investment Directors Vote to Repeal Ethics Rule


Most Commented This Month

Closed Out? Norman Finkelstein, Controversial Scholar Denied Tenure, Can't Find a Job. | 104

Group Argues That Out-of-Class Learning Is Domain of Faculty, Not Student Affairs | 92

Is There a 'Growing Backlash' Against the SAT? | 59

College Settles With Instructor Fired for Teaching Adam and Eve as Myth | 54

Fresh Artistic Controversy Hits Yale U. | 52

By Category

Athletics
Community Colleges
Government & Politics
Information Technology
International
Money & Management
Northern Illinois
Research & Books
Short Subjects
Students
The Faculty

Blog Archives

Search

Keep Up to Date

Daily news blog: RSS  / Atom

Daily news reported by The Chronicle: RSS

Contact us

April 25, 2007

Appeals Court Upholds Dismissal of Lawsuits Over Texas A&M Bonfire Accident

A federal appeals court has upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit filed by the families of those killed and injured at Texas A&M University at College Station in 1999, when a huge stack of logs being assembled for a bonfire collapsed. In an opinion issued on Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit unanimously affirmed a lower court’s ruling that university officials had “qualified immunity” from the lawsuit, which alleged that constitutional protections of the unskilled students working to build the bonfire were violated. Twelve students died and 27 others were injured when the 59-foot stack of logs collapsed. The court ruled that a legal theory in injury cases, known as the “state-created danger theory,” had not been firmly established in the Fifth Circuit at the time of the tragedy, and therefore could not be employed by plaintiffs in the lawsuit. —Martin Van Der Werf

Posted on Wednesday April 25, 2007 | Permalink |