In October 2022, Sydney Meegan—a college freshman with a severe milk allergy—died from anaphylaxis in her residence hall at Colorado State University. She had carried epinephrine her whole life. She had trained her roommate to recognize a reaction. She did everything right. But when the emergency happened, the response failed.

Her family’s lawsuit alleges that staff did not call 911 when Sydney showed clear signs of anaphylaxis, and that the university’s emergency procedures were inadequate. Colorado responded by passing Sydney Meegan’s Law in 2023—making it the first state in the nation to require colleges and universities to stock epinephrine. (Source: Allergic Living, June 2024)

Sydney’s death—and the lawsuit that followed—illustrates a reality that too many administrators still don’t understand: the legal risk isn’t in having epinephrine. The legal risk is in not having it.

I have led legislative campaigns across the country to pass stock epinephrine laws. A frequent question from school administrators wasn’t “Will this save lives?” It was “Will we get sued?”

Let me be crystal clear: The questions is not whether stocking  epinephrine protects you legally. The issue is that not stocking it may expose you to risk.

Here’s what most people don’t realize: The primary purpose of all 49 state laws allowing or requiring stock epinephrine in K-12 schools is liability protection. These laws the administrator who procures the medication, the school board who approves the policy, the staff member who administers it, and the prescribing physician.

If you follow your state’s protocols, stock the medication, train your staff, and someone uses that epinephrine during an emergency, you have legal protection. Even if a parent comes back later claiming you shouldn’t have given their child epinephrine, there’s no lawsuit. The law shields you.

Now here’s the question that should keep every administrator up at night: What happens when an institution chooses not to stock epinephrine—when the law explicitly allows it—and then someone has a severe allergic reaction on campus?

The legal theory is straightforward. If a foreseeable emergency occurs, and you failed to take a reasonable, low-cost, legally protected step to prepare for it, you have exposure. Courts regularly find liability when institutions ignore known risks. Stock epinephrine laws exist precisely because legislatures recognized this risk. Choosing not to act—when the law gives you both permission and protection—could be interpreted as a failure to meet a basic standard of care.

No court has ruled on this exact question yet. But the precedent is being set in cases like the Meegan family’s lawsuit against Colorado State, the Gilbert family’s wrongful death suit against Trinity International University, and the Brown family’s settlement with Duval County Public Schools in Florida. In each case, the allegation is the same: the institution failed to respond adequately to a foreseeable emergency. Do you want to be the test case?

Let me frame this another way: Approximately 25% of severe allergic reactions in schools occur in students with no previously diagnosed allergies. These kids don’t have prescribed epinephrine. They’re trying a food for the first time at a party or celebration, or perhaps they are stung by a bee for the first time, and suddenly they’re in crisis. If your institution has no stock epinephrine, what happens next?

The legal analysis is straightforward: