ILNews

Mother files suit challenging school bus fee

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A woman in Marion County has filed a lawsuit against a community school corporation because she claims the fee imposed for her children to ride the bus to school interferes with their constitutional right to an education.

Lora Hoagland’s two children are enrolled in Franklin Township public schools and qualify for free or reduced lunch. Due to budget issues, the school corporation voted to stop providing bus service this school year and contracted with Central Indiana Educational Service Center to provide the busing. Those who want their children to ride the bus now must pay more than $400 per child for the school year.

Hoagland says she can’t afford the fees so she has been driving her children to school. She claims that the school corporation’s decision deprives her children of their constitutional right to a free education, and it interferes with the children’s compliance with state law that children must attend school.

“Indiana law guarantees children an education whereby tuition is without charge, requires children to attend school and prohibits public schools from directly or indirectly assessing Bus Fees upon students enrolled in public schools,” the suit says.

In July 2010, Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller issued an official opinion on charging students to ride the bus, finding collecting these fees is unconstitutional.

Hoagland wants the judge to order the school system to transport students to school for free and to find the discontinuation of the bus service to be unconstitutional. She also seeks to have the suit certified as a class action.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT