In the case of Wood et al. v. Strickland et al., 1974, the U.S Supreme Court addressed whether school board members could be held personally liable for damages under a federal civil rights law when they expelled two students from high school without a hearing. The court ruled that while public officials do not have absolute immunity from liability in such cases, they are shielded from liability if their actions were taken in good faith and with reasonable belief that their conduct was lawful (the "good-faith" defense). However, this protection does not apply if it can be shown that the official should reasonably have known his action violated clearly established constitutional rights or if he acted with malicious intent to cause deprivation of constitutional rights. In this particular case, because there was no evidence of malice on part of the school board members and since due process requirements for student discipline were unclear at that time, they could invoke good-faith immunity.

The dissenting opinion in the Wood v. Strickland case argued that school board members should be granted absolute immunity from damages for actions taken within their official capacity, rather than the qualified immunity decided by the majority. The dissenters believed this was necessary to ensure that these officials could perform their duties without fear of personal liability or constant litigation threats. They also disagreed with the majority's standard for determining when a school board member loses his or her immunity, arguing it was too vague and subjective, potentially leading to inconsistent results across different cases. Furthermore, they expressed concern about how this decision might deter competent individuals from serving on school boards due to potential legal risks involved.