Tuesday, January 6, 2026
Page 1
Court of Appeal:
Parents May Bear Some Blame for Coach’s Abuse of Minor
School District Wants Its Liability for $2 Million of $5 Million Judgment Reduced; Justices Say Jury Must Decide Whether Some of Fault Must Be Allocated to Mother, Father; Failure to Monitor Child’s Tracking App Cited
By a MetNews Staff Writer
A case in which the plaintiff was awarded $5 million in damages based on having entered into a romance with the assistant coach of the girl’s basketball team when she was a 17-year-old high school senior and was subjected to sexual touchings by him will be heading for a new trial on apportionment of damages because, the Court of Appeal has held, her parents might be partially responsible based on a lack of supervision.
Among evidence of possible parental fault, Justice Julia C. Kelety of the Fourth District’s Div. One recited in Friday’s unpublished opinion, is that the mother did not check the tracking device on the phone of her daughter, identified in the opinion as “Jane Doe”; did not, upon realizing that the app was being disabled at night, question the daughter as to the reason; and, after the daughter ceased turning the app off, did not monitor it.
The mother also knew that after-school private coaching by Jordan Bucklew sometimes included a small group of girls but at other times involved only her daughter.
‘I Knew It’
When police questioned the girl’s father concerning the conduct on the part of the assistant coach, he said:
“I’ve been watching this entire season the interaction between her and him because I don’t like it. I don’t like their relationship….And I’m intently watching because I don’t trust what’s going on….I knew it. I knew it. I knew it.”
A jury on March 11, 2024, assessed $2.5 million in past non-economic damages and $2.5 million in future non-economic damages, finding Bucklew 10% responsible and the Coronado Unified School District (“CUSD”) 90% at fault based on negligent hiring, supervision, and retention. San Diego Superior Court Judge Kevin A. Enright on May 2, 2024, acting on CUSD’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, granted it in part by reallocating blame, determining the school district to be liable for 40 percent of the award and Bucklew for the balance.
Saddled with liability in the amount of $2 million, CUSD sought on appeal to have the amount pared by that percentage of fault ascribable to the parents.
Kelety’s Decision
Kelety wrote:
“We affirm the jury’s finding that CUSD was negligent, its recognition of Jordan Bucklew’s culpability, and the amount of the award of damages. But we conclude the trial court erred in excluding Doe’s parents from the special verdict form’s list of individuals and entities to whom the jury could assign a percentage of fault for purposes of apportioning noneconomic damages. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a limited retrial on the apportionment of fault.”
She went on go say:
“[I]n this case. Doe’s parents had a duty to use reasonable measures to protect her from foreseeable injury at Bucklew’s hands.
“Our legal determination that the parents owed Doe a duty of care in this case does not end the matter. Although the decision as to whether the parents breached their duty to their daughter should be left to the jury… for purposes of this appeal, we must determine whether the record contains substantial evidence of breach such that the parents should have been placed on the special verdict form….”
No View Expressed
The jurist continued:
“We do not offer an opinion as to whether a jury would conclude that any fault should be allocated to the parents. But. under the particular facts of this case, there was evidence from which the jury could have concluded that one or both of Doe’s parents knew or should have known that Bucklew posed a risk of sexual misconduct toward Doe and that a reasonable parent would have taken additional steps to investigate Doe’s unusual behaviors and/or her contact with and relationship with Bucklew. The evidence that the parents may have known or should have known that Doe was participating in one-on-one training with Bucklew. combined with evidence as to their lack of follow-up on red flags, is sufficient substantial evidence to support placing the parents on the special verdict form as potentially sharing fault with the defendants.”
Kelety added:
“In asking the jury to consider that question, we recognize that every parent-child relationship is different, and that supervision, especially supervision of older teenagers, is not a one-size-fits-all proposition. Parents must balance appropriate standards and verification of the teen’s behavior with demonstration of trust. Every child is unique, and every parent must necessarily exercise discretion in deciding how closely to supervise their teenage child.”
The case is Doe v. Coronado Unified School District, D084342.
Bucklew on Oct. 27, 2020, as part of a plea bargain, pled guilty to the felony charge of engaging in a sex act with a minor who was more than three years younger than he. He was sentenced by San Diego Superior Court Judge Michael Popkins on Dec, 23, 2020, to three years of probation, including one year in custody which he served in the county’s electronic monitoring program.
Over the parents’ protests, Popkins declined to require that Bucklew register as a sex offender.
Copyright 2026, Metropolitan News Company