the defendants and April Page in such a way to distinguish this case from the holding in D.R. The alleged attack on April Page was by fellow students, not by agents of the school district or the City of Philadelphia. Under the rationale of DeShaney and D.R., April Page did not stand in a special relationship to the defendants because April Page was not in the physical custody of Officer Zulka, the City of Philadelphia, or the school district defendants. The agreement reached between the defendants and Raymond Page did not limit April Page’s or her parents’ freedom to act on her behalf, and thus such an agreement did not establish a special relationship so as to raise constitutional implications. See Graham v. Independent School District No. 1-89, 22 F.3d 991, 994-95 (10th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). The defendants are entitled to judgment as a
holding that a students right to bodily integrity under the fourteenth amendment encompasses a students right to be free from sexual assaults by his or her teachers holding that transfer rule denying eligibility to students transferring from public to private schools did not violate the students rights to due process or equal protection of the laws as provided by the fourteenth amendment holding that school district policy requiring that students obtain the review and approval of school officials prior to distributing any written material violated free speech rights of students holding that schools have no duty under the due process clause to protect students from assaults by other students even where the school knew or should have known of the danger presented holding that the defendant school officials did not create the students danger or increase their risk of harm where female students were physically verbally and sexually molested by male students in a unisex bathroom and in a darkroom