COURT Rulings & Settlements

DUE PROCESS Legal Update: 5 New Federal Complaints. 3 New Federal Court Decisions.

, , , /

DUE PROCESS Legal Update: 5 New Federal Complaints. 3 New Federal Court Decisions.

As the Department of Education continues to consider more than 100,000 comments on its proposed new Title IX regulations, the tide of lawsuits from accused students who allege they were denied a fair process in campus judicial proceedings continues to rise in the courts.

Five new federal complaints were filed in September, against Eastern Kentucky University, the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, the University of Pittsburgh, Rice University, and the University of Maine Farmington. September also brought three new federal court decisions, continuing to reshape the relationship between higher education and the judiciary.

Most notably, on Sept. 23, a jury found Boston College liable for breaching its contract with a student who was wrongly found responsible for sexual misconduct in a case of mistaken identity… Last week, a federal district court in Tennessee dismissed a student’s lawsuit against Vanderbilt University stemming from his expulsion from Vanderbilt without a hearing, without the opportunity to confront his accuser, and without the opportunity to see all of the evidence against him.

Even at public universities, where students are constitutionally entitled to at least some degree of procedural fairness, there are many hurdles to getting relief in the courts.

thefire.org– Samantha Harris

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
APPEALS COURT Upholds $130K Judgment Against Pomona College For Railroading Falsely Accused Student

, , , /

APPEALS COURT Upholds $130K Judgment Against Pomona College For Railroading Falsely Accused Student

Lawyers for “John Doe” wanted Pomona College to pay at least $250,000 in attorney’s fees for repeatedly violating its own policies to find the accused student responsible for sexual assault. They got about half that from Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mary Strobel, who said Pomona’s conduct was so egregious that she couldn’t “conclude that the factual scenario was unique and unlikely to recur.” (Pomona attempted to retry Doe with the same approach Strobel struck down.)

The private college appealed. The result? More money for Doe.

A California appeals court upheld the $130,000 judgment against Pomona in a ruling Thursday and awarded Doe “his costs on appeal,” concluding “there was no abuse of discretion” by Judge Strobel. “We are very pleased the Court of Appeal affirmed the order for Pomona College to pay $130,000 of attorney fees incurred in overturning the college’s bad Title IX decision,” Doe’s lawyer Mark Hathaway said. “The student has graduated but Pomona College withheld his degree for a year and the student is still fighting to clear his record.”

thecollegefix-Greg Piper

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
RULING: Judge Temporarily Dismisses Doe’s Case Against USC’s Title IX’s Sex Policy

, , /

RULING: Judge Temporarily Dismisses Doe’s Case Against USC’s Title IX’s Sex Policy

Judge Michelle Williams dismissed a sexual assault lawsuit filed against USC by a male student Monday morning. The plaintiff, John Doe, demanded that the University’s sexual misconduct policy be declared unenforceable. John Doe, a USC student currently studying abroad, is accused of sexual misconduct with his ex-girlfriend in his dorm room in 2016. However, it wasn’t until September 2018 that the plaintiff was notified by USC’s Title IX office of a report accusing him of attempted sexual assault and non-consensual sexual contact.

John Doe filed his lawsuit on Feb. 21, 2019, a week after USC adopted a new sexual misconduct investigation policy. Doe complained that this policy does not adhere to the requirements set by multiple California appellate court decisions. In his lawsuit, Doe also sought to ensure that USC would no longer be able to enforce this policy against himself and other students.

According to the Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michelle Williams, the lawsuit was premature as the plaintiff’s case was still under review by the University. Moreover, the plaintiff’s motion to strike was dismissed, whereas his demurrer was sustained, but postponed. Currently, the court proceedings have been postponed as John Doe is studying abroad.

uscannenbergmedia-Patel, Burke, & Davidson

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
RULING. No DNA Evidence-Yet Male Expelled Over Her False TitleIX Rape Claim. Now Male Can Sue Girl For 5 Counts of Defamation.

, , /

RULING. No DNA Evidence-Yet Male Expelled Over Her False TitleIX Rape Claim. Now Male Can Sue Girl For 5 Counts of Defamation.

A federal district judge has allowed a male student’s defamation lawsuit against a female student who accused him of rape to survive a motion to dismiss. The two students attended Syracuse University.

In 2017, the two attended a party at John’s fraternity, which was co-hosted by Jane’s sorority. Surveillance footage from the night showed the two students entering John’s room around 12:30 in the morning. The two awoke in the same bed the next morning, fully clothed, with no memory of what happened the night before.  Jane went for a sexual assault examination. A DNA analysis of Jane’s vagina found no male DNA.

Despite these findings, indicating no sex occurred, Jane reported John to the Syracuse Police Department. Police investigated the claim and closed the case without charging John, since there was no physical evidence that any sexual contact occurred and Jane said in interviews she couldn’t remember what happened that night. Syracuse police forwarded the results of their investigation to the Onondaga County District Attorney’s Office, which conducted its own investigation and came to the same conclusion as the police. The report from the DA concluded, “There is no credible proof of any sexual conduct in this case, consensual or non-consensual.”

In June 2017, however, Jane took her claims to Syracuse University’s Title IX department. Jane initially told school investigators that she had no memory of the night in question but weeks later said she experienced “sudden flashes of memories following a visit to a therapist.” After these allegedly recovered memories, Jane claimed John raped and sodomized her without her consent.

Despite no physical evidence of her claims, Syracuse expelled John based on Jane’s say-so alone. Jane went to John’s fraternity the next day and bragged that “her rapist was expelled.”  Jane then began publicly claiming that John was a “rapist,” which resulted in him losing his internship. John included six instances of Jane’s “defamation.” Judge Mauskopf accepted most of John’s arguments that Jane had defamed him except one.

dailywire-Ashe Schow

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
JURY FINDS Boston College Interfered​ in 2012 Hearing, Awards John Doe Damages

, , , , /

JURY FINDS Boston College Interfered​ in 2012 Hearing, Awards John Doe Damages

The lawsuit brought by a Boston College alumnus against the University for allegedly interfering in his 2012 disciplinary hearing over sexual assault accusations went to jury trial recently. A federal jury ruled in favor of the Boston College alumnus who had sued the University for improper interference in violation of fair process in his 2012 disciplinary hearing on Monday. The jury awarded the alumnus—referred to by the pseudonym “John Doe”—$102,426.50 in damages: $24,819.50 for tuition and fees for the semester he was suspended and $77,607 for one year of lost income as a result of his delayed graduation from BC.

  

The scope of the trial had been limited significantly—per presiding District Court Judge Denise Casper’s instructions, jurors were to consider only whether administrators improperly interfered in the hearings through two key communications, violating the Student Code of Conduct and the implied promise of basic fairness.

In the months leading up to the trial, Casper ruled out the testimony of several witnesses who would have testified about whether BC violated Title IX, the role of the University’s general counsel in the disciplinary process, and Doe’s emotional state around the time of the disciplinary process, as well as in the years that followed. Although the jurors heard testimonies related to Doe’s claim that another student—identified in court as “JK”—committed the alleged sexual assault and the hearing process itself, such information was only used to establish background surrounding the case.  Casper instructed the jury to consider only three questions: whether a contract—both explicit and implicit—existed in the student guide, whether there was a breach of contract, and whether Doe is owed damages.

The jury said that the plaintiff proved by a preponderance of evidence that the Dean of Students office improperly interfered with the hearings in two communications with the head of the board, and therefore breached its contract with Doe to provide basic fairness. The jury also said that Doe proved by a preponderance of evidence that the interference caused the board to find him responsible. The preponderance of evidence standard is based on whether evidence points to at least a 51 percent chance the breach of contract occurred.

Heights magazine bcheights.com/magazine -Martin, Baker, &  Zhang  bcheights– Jack Miller

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
SETTLEMENT: UVA and Former Male Student Reach Agreement; Judge Dismisses Federal Case

, , /

SETTLEMENT: UVA and Former Male Student Reach Agreement; Judge Dismisses Federal Case

A lawsuit from a former University of Virginia student who said he was denied his degree due to a pending Title IX sexual misconduct investigation has been dropped, according to court records. A U.S. district court judge dismissed the case on Sept. 11 after both sides reached an agreement, according to court documents.

The male student, John Doe, filed the lawsuit in June against members of UVa’s Board of Visitors, President Jim Ryan and two Title IX officials in June. He alleged that his constitutional rights have been violated during the university’s Title IX investigation.

dailyprogress-Staff

 

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
TWO SETTLEMENTS, TWO COLLEGES: Tulane Settles And Yale Expunges Student’s Record.

, , /

TWO SETTLEMENTS, TWO COLLEGES: Tulane Settles And Yale Expunges Student’s Record.

TULANE 

YALE. Following a months long legal battle with Daniel Tenreiro-Braschi ’19, who sued Yale after being disciplined for sexual misconduct, the University expunged his suspension from his academic record.

Although Tenreiro-Braschi and the University agreed to dismiss the lawsuit and bear their own costs in May 2018, the terms of their settlement were not disclosed to the public. Earlier this week, however, Tenreiro-Braschi sent the News a letter written by his residential college dean Nilakshi Parndigamage that reveals what may have been a part of the settlement. According to Tenreiro-Braschi, he received his diploma

yaledailynews-S. Cho & A. Steinkamp

14 Colleges that have settled    35 Documented TitleIX false accusations

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
TWO APPEALS. One Court Rejects TIX Suit by Mr. Klocke, Dad of Accused Student Who Killed Himself. One Court Ruled in Favor on Klocke’s Defamation Claim

, , /

TWO APPEALS. One Court Rejects TIX Suit by Mr. Klocke, Dad of Accused Student Who Killed Himself. One Court Ruled in Favor on Klocke’s Defamation Claim

An appeals court knocked down a lawsuit filed by the estate of a Texas student who took his own life after being found responsible for harassing a gay student. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a lower court that Thomas Klocke’s estate hadn’t shown that the case was about “sexual harassment.” The three-judge panel didn’t buy the estate’s argument that the school erred in classifying the case under harassment, and not sexual harassment. The latter classification would have allowed Klocke to receive “procedural protections” such as a “hearing before a neutral decision maker.” The court also shut down the selective-enforcement claim by claiming the estate had not provided evidence that a “person of the opposite sex was in circumstances sufficiently similar to plaintiff’s and was treated more favorably by defendant.”

Thomas Klocke was close to completing his studies in May 2017 and hoped to continue his studies at grad or law school. Instead, he took his own life. Thomas Klocke had insisted the gay student, Nicholas Watson, made repeated “unwelcome sexual advances” toward him, and then accused Klocke to protect himself from similar allegations. The suit alleged that a UTA official biased toward Watson had purposely redirected the proceeding outside of Title IX to avoid giving Klocke the protections he was owed. Despite the conflicting narratives, the UTA official believed Watson.

While the 5th Circuit has shut down the case against UTA, it ruled in favor of Klocke’s estate last month on the defamation case against Watson. In that case, a different three-judge panel found the district court’s use of Texas law to shut down the defamation claim was at odds with federal law, and remanded the case to the trial level. Kenneth Chaiken, lawyer for Wayne Klocke, said  the Klockes will continue their litigation efforts.

thecollegefix-Ethan Berman

Share this:Tweet about this on Twitter
«< 8 9 10 11 12 >»