By Taylor M. Nelson & Michael S. Carroll
For many adults, childhood memories include pickup football games on blacktop courts, scraped knees, bruised elbows, and being told to walk it off. Hard surfaces were once viewed as a normal part of growing up, and injuries were often dismissed as minor rites of passage. Today, some may characterize increased safety precautions as “soft,” but evolving medical knowledge surrounding head trauma tells a different story. A recently filed lawsuit against a California school district highlights how injuries sustained during informal schoolyard games on the blacktop may expose educational institutions to significant legal exposure.
The lawsuit was filed against the Folsom Cordova Unified School District after a 12-year-old student allegedly sustained severe head trauma while playing two-hand touch football at Folsom Middle School. According to the complaint, students were routinely permitted to play football on the blacktop during school hours. During the course of one of these games, the student allegedly struck his head on the pavement. The complaint further alleges that despite signs of concussion, visible pain, and continued distress, school personnel did not immediately call an ambulance following the incident. Instead, the student was taken in a wheelchair to the nurse’s office by school staff, and his mother was contacted.
At the center of the case are questions involving duty of care, supervision, and foreseeability. Schools owe students a general duty to provide reasonable supervision and maintain a reasonably safe environment during the school day. In negligence claims, courts often examine whether school officials knew or should have known of a dangerous condition and whether reasonable steps were taken to reduce the risk of harm. If students were regularly allowed to play football on blacktop surfaces, a court may consider whether the risk of falls, collisions, and head injuries was foreseeable.
The blacktop itself is a significant factor in legal analysis. Unlike grass or turf, pavement presents an unforgiving playing surface with little impact absorption. While prior generations may view blacktop injuries as part of childhood, modern risk management standards require institutions to evaluate known hazards through the lens of current medical knowledge rather than nostalgia. What may once have been considered routine horseplay can now create substantial legal exposure when serious injury results.
The condition of the playing surface may also become relevant. Beyond the inherent hardness of pavement, a court may consider whether the blacktop was properly maintained, level, and free from cracks, depressions, divots, or other surface defects that could increase the likelihood of falls or head injury. If hazardous conditions existed and were not corrected, a school’s exposure may extend beyond supervision concerns to premises liability principles. Institutions that permit student activity on aging or damaged surfaces should regularly inspect, repair, resurface, or restrict access when necessary.
The case also raises concerns regarding post-jury response procedures. When a student displays symptoms consistent with a concussion, dizziness, confusion, or severe pain, prompt medical evaluation becomes critical. Delays in treatment may increase both medical complications and institutional liability. Schools are expected to train staff to recognize head injuries and respond appropriately in emergencies. In the state of California, several overlapping areas of California law may be applicable.
Enacted in 2012, California Education Code § 49475 is a state law that regulates the management of concussions and head injuries in student athletes. The law mandates safety protocols for any pupil suspected of sustaining a concussion during athletic activities, medical evaluation by a professional, and return-to-play procedures in schools. However, subsection (c) of the statute reads,
“[t]his section does not apply to an athlete engaging in an athletic activity during the regular school day or as part of a physical education course required pursuant to subdivision (d) of Section 51220.”
The complaint notes that students were permitted to play on the blacktop during school hours. A court would need to consider whether “during school hours” would satisfy the statutory exclusion of athletes engaging in “athletic activity” and whether it occurred in some sort of physical education class. Either condition would seem to satisfy the statutory exclusion. Although § 49475 itself does not define “athletic activity,” related California statutes define it as Interscholastic sports or school-sponsored contests, competitions, practices, or scrimmages. A game of two-hand-touch football does not seem to meet this definition.
Another applicable California law is California Health and Safety Code § 124235, which mandates procedures for an athlete who is suspected of having sustained a concussion. A key difference is that this statute applies more broadly to any “youth sport organization” and may thus cover something like an athletic activity, not part of a formal interscholastic program.
California Government Code § 835 States:
[A] public entity is liable for injury caused by a dangerous condition of its property if the plaintiff establishes that the property was in a dangerous condition at the time of the injury, that the injury was proximately caused by the dangerous condition, that the dangerous condition created a reasonably foreseeable risk of the kind of injury which was incurred, and that either:
- A negligent or wrongful act or omission of an employee of the public entity within the scope of his employment created the dangerous condition; or
- The public entity had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition under Section 835.2 a sufficient time prior to the injury to have taken measures to protect against the dangerous condition.
This statute applies to public property and known dangerous conditions, such as worn or crumbling blacktops.
From a risk management perspective, schools should carefully evaluate where contact-based games are permitted during recess, lunch, and other unstructured activity periods. Collision-oriented games on blacktop or similar hard surfaces create obvious hazards. Schools may reduce exposure by restricting high-impact games to safer surfaces, increasing active supervision, implementing activity guidelines, and training employees in emergency response protocols. These measures not only protect students but also help schools demonstrate reasonable care.
Ultimately, injuries occurring outside formal athletic settings can raise the same liability concerns as those in organized sports. The lawsuit against Folsom Cordova Unified School District serves as a reminder that foreseeable risks require proactive supervision and timely response. To protect student well-being and limit legal exposure, schools must apply sound risk management principles across all student activities, including informal play.
References
California Government Code § 835 (*2023). https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=835.&lawCode=GOV
California Education Code § 49475 (2025).
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=EDC§ionNum=49475
California Health and Safety Code § 124235 (2025). https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=124235.&lawCode=HSC
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2024). HEADS UP to youth sports: Concussion safety in sports. https://www.cdc.gov/headsup/index.html
Harmon, K. G., Drezner, J. A., Gammons, M., Guskiewicz, K. M., Halstead, M., Herring, S. A., Kutcher, J. S., Pana, A., Putukian, M., & Roberts, W. O. (2013). American Medical Society for Sports Medicine position statement: Concussion in sport. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 47(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2012-091941
Schmidt, C. (2026, April 7). Folsom student’s schoolyard injury sparks lawsuit for school district. The Sacramento Bee. https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article315329826.html
Taylor M. Nelson is an Athletic Operations Coordinator in collegiate athletics, overseeing team logistics, budgeting, and event operations for multiple sports programs. She is also a doctoral candidate in Sport Management at Troy University, with research interests in student athlete development, governance and compliance, and policies that shape equitable and effective athletic environments.
Michael S. Carroll serves as a Professor of Sport Management at Troy University, where he specializes in sport law and risk management within the sport and recreation industries. A prolific scholar, he has authored over 40 articles and delivered more than 50 presentations at professional conferences. Dr. Carroll also plays a vital role in mentorship, working closely with candidates in Troy’s doctoral program. He lives in Orlando, FL.
