I have to admit that I do not understand how the distinction you are making between statistical analysis and “reasonable person thing” applies to my statements in this case, calmom. I look at situations and make an assessment of what I think is most probable. That seems to me to be consistent with the idea of the “reasonable person” view. It does seem to bother posters who only want settled facts. There is no good way to do a statistical analysis in this case that I can think of, short of presenting 500 math teachers with a situation, asking “what would you do,” and tallying the answers.
From CateCAParent’s post, I deduce that one can breach a contract if the other party cannot allege officially recognizable damages in the situation? Then the Court would probably not have reached the point of assessing whether the contract had actually been breached or not. Is that correct? I suspect that is still an open question. We have the Adetus’ claim that the settlement agreement was breached. It sort of looks to me as though it was.
If I were ever to enter into a settlement agreement with anyone, I would expect it to be honored. In my personal ethical system, the more powerful party (the school, in this case) always needs to be particularly solicitous of the rights of the less powerful party (the student and family). I realize this is not necessarily the way the world works. But I’d expect that it would, if observant Quakers were in charge.