Appellate court rules teachers can have sex with 18-year-old students

[8BR]

Awesome! Get your teaching cert and you can go to prom this year!

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...entsex13m.html

[TripletDaddy]

why would an appellate court be ruling on this issue?

Seems like an ethical question, not a legal one. isn't it already established that once you are 18, you are of the age of consent?

[creekster]

why would an appellate court be ruling on this issue?

Seems like an ethical question, not a legal one. isn't it already established that once you are 18, you are of the age of consent?

The link, firend, follow the link.

[TripletDaddy]

The link, firend, follow the link.

I guess i still don't get why the judge didn't just grant summary judgment when it came before him. I still fail to see the issue if the girl was 18 at the time, even if she were a student and he a teacher.

[creekster]

I guess i still don't get why the judge didn't just grant summary judgment when it came before him. I still fail to see the issue if the girl was 18 at the time, even if she were a student and he a teacher.

It says he challneged a refusal to dismiss his case. Not artfully stated perhspa, but I am guessing he filed a 12(b) type motion or demurrer and it was denied. He took a writ or an appeal (I am sure SU and others could tell us what it is called) and the appellate panel held that the statute did not apply to 18 year olds. This all happened, it appears, well before anybody would have filed a MSJ.

[TripletDaddy]

It says he challneged a refusal to dismiss his case. Not artfully stated perhspa, but I am guessing he filed a 12(b) type motion or demurrer and it was denied. He took a writ or an appeal (I am sure SU and others could tell us what it is called) and the appellate panel held that the statute did not apply to 18 year olds. This all happened, it appears, well before anybody would have filed a MSJ.

ah. ok.

i vaguely remember Civ Pro.

[creekster]

Actually, we both look silly becasue it was a criminal case. The general idea of a pre-trial motion to dismiss still applies, but the procedures and rule numbers do not. There would not be, of course, a MSJ under any circumstance.