Cases & Developments - National Association of College and University Attorneys

FILTERS

Latest Cases & Developments

Date:
6/9/2023
Rolovich v. Wash. State Univ. (E.D. Wash. May 30, 2023)
Order granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff, a former head football coach at Washington State University, brought discrimination and contract claims against the University and its Athletics Director after he was terminated following denial of his COVID-19 vaccine religious exemption request. Plaintiff’s contract provided for liquidated damages of 60% of his base salary for the term of the agreement in the event of termination without just cause. In permitting plaintiff’s failure to accommodate claim to proceed against the University, the court held that (1) he sufficiently pleaded that his Catholic faith informed his decision not to receive the vaccine and (2) the University’s assertions that his decision resulted in lost donations and negative press were insufficient at this stage to support an undue hardship finding. It permitted his contract claim to proceed, finding that whether the University had just cause for his termination similarly depended upon its evidence of undue hardship. It dismissed his religious discrimination claim against the Athletics Director under §1983, however, finding that the Director participated in the exemption review process as outlined in University policy and that this policy permitted a supervisor to question the sincerity of an employee’s asserted religious beliefs.
Topics:
Campus Police, Safety, & Crisis Management | Coronavirus | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Religious Discrimination & Accommodation
Date:
6/9/2023
J.L. v. Rockefeller Univ. (N.Y. Sup. Ct. May 25, 2023)
Decision and Order granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendant’s Partial Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff alleged that he was sexually assaulted by a doctor employed by Rockefeller University Hospital between 1957 and 1966, when he was between the ages of seven and sixteen, during appointments for physical exams. The court permitted plaintiff to proceed in his negligent hiring, retention, supervision and/or direction claim, finding that he had sufficiently alleged that hospital staff were aware that the doctor was abusing children and that he had taken inappropriate photographs of his victims while they were patients in the hospital. It dismissed his intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress claims, finding the allegations duplicative of the negligence claims. In dismissed his breach of duty in loco parentis claim, finding that because the hospital did not have long-term custody or supervision of plaintiff, the duty applicable to schools as contemplated in the case law did not apply to the hospital.
Topics:
Compliance & Risk Management | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Employee Sexual Misconduct | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Sex Discrimination | Tort Litigation
Date:
6/2/2023
Li v. Ne. Univ. (W.D. Wash. May 30, 2023)
Order granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff, a former marketing manager at Northeastern University’s Seattle Campus who was diagnosed with conditions making it difficult for her to type, sit at her desk, or speak for extended periods, brought state-law failure to accommodate, disparate treatment, and retaliation claims against the University after it placed her on a performance improvement plan (PIP) and terminated her for failing to meet job expectations. After taking intermittent and then continuous FMLA leave, the University denied her ADA accommodation request for speech-to-text software, noting she still would be unable to perform essential functions, and terminated her employment. Sitting in diversity, the court permitted plaintiff to proceed on her failure to accommodate claim, finding that questions of fact remained as to (1) whether she could have performed her duties with the help of the software and (2) whether the University had engaged sufficiently in an interactive process. It granted summary judgment to the University, however, on her disparate treatment and retaliation claims.
Topics:
Disability Discrimination | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Retaliation
Date:
6/2/2023
Brown v. Bd. of Regents for the Univ. Sys. of Ga. (S.D. Ga. May 25, 2023)
Order denying Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs, here and in a parallel order, are two former police officers for Savannah State University (SSU) whose positions were eliminated in a reduction in force (RIF) initiative. They alleged that their termination was in retaliation for their actions encouraging two colleagues to file sexual harassment complaints against SSU’s former Police Chief. In denying SSU’s Motion for Summary Judgment, the court first held that plaintiffs’ opposition to the alleged harassment was protected activity and that they had adequately demonstrated that the decision makers were aware of that opposition. It then held that the timeline, testimony about the impetus for the departmental restructuring, and the fact that only plaintiffs’ positions were eliminated were sufficient to raise a question as to whether budgetary reasons were a pretextual motive for the RIF.
Topics:
Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Retaliation
Date:
5/26/2023
Ogbonna-McGruder v. Austin Peay State Univ. (M.D. Tenn. May 19, 2023)
Memorandum Opinion granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff, a professor of public management and criminal justice at Austin Peay State University, brought hostile work environment and retaliatory hostile work environment claims against the University based on a series of perceived administrative slights and a denied joint appointment to the restructured Public Management and Criminal Justice Departments. In dismissing her hostile work environment claim, the court found that most of plaintiff’s allegations concerning employment-related actions were factually insufficient to support an inference of race-based harassment. It found only three actions that were potentially harassing in nature, including two comments that were arguably insults related to her work and one instance of scolding in front of a colleague. It held, however, that these were insufficiently severe and pervasive to alter the terms and conditions of her employment or to dissuade a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination.
Topics:
Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Race and National Origin Discrimination | Retaliation
Date:
5/26/2023
Imungi v. Va. Commonwealth Univ. (E.D. Va. May 19, 2023)
Memorandum Opinion granting Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff, an associate professor in the School of Social Work (SSW) at Virginia Commonwealth University who was born and raised in Kenya, brought discrimination and retaliation claims against the University after the SSW Dean declined to renew her one-year administrative appointment as Director of Field Education, a position that was charged with supporting the Dean’s vision for the SSW. Plaintiff’s discrimination claim failed because (1) complaints about her communications with others and clashes with the Dean over priorities confirmed that she did not meet the Dean’s legitimate performance expectations and (2) the interim Director who had never been evaluated by the Dean and who was never a permanent Director was not an adequate comparator. Her retaliation claim failed because the Dean had asked for her resignation prior to a public assembly on racism and discrimination in the SSW at which plaintiff made remarks she asserted were protected activity.
Topics:
Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Race and National Origin Discrimination | Retaliation
Date:
5/26/2023
Frierson v. The Shaw Univ. (E.D. N.C. May 19, 2023)
Order granting Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff, a former Director of Student Retention at Shaw University, brought a Title IX claim against the University after he was terminated for sexually harassing a student. In response to an OCR investigation that found the University had not given him specific notice of the allegations against him, reasonable opportunity to respond, or an opportunity to confront or question his accuser, the University reopened the investigation with an impartial investigator. Plaintiff declined to participate, and the University upheld its decision to terminate him. In granting summary judgment in favor of the University, the court held that no rational jury could find he complied with the University’s policies or that the decision to terminate him was based on his sex.
Topics:
Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Employee Sexual Misconduct | Sex Discrimination | Sex Discrimination in Employment
Date:
5/26/2023
Beuca v. Wash. State Univ. (E.D. Wash. May 19, 2023)
Order granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff, a former medical student employed by Washington State University and completing a residency at Providence Regional Medical Center, brought discrimination claims against the University after it declined to grant him a religious exemption to its COVID-19 vaccination requirement and terminated him, even though the Center had granted the exemption. In granting the University’s Motion to Dismiss, the court held that (1) plaintiff’s allegations were conclusory because he alleged no facts as to the nature of his sincerely held religious belief or when or how he had requested the exemption from the University and (2) the University successfully asserted undue hardship because permitting plaintiff to work in a hospital without a vaccination posed an increased risk to patients of COVID-19 exposure.
Topics:
Campus Police, Safety, & Crisis Management | Coronavirus | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Religious Discrimination & Accommodation
Date:
5/26/2023
Orr v. S. Dakota Bd. of Regents (D. S.D. May 11, 2023)
Memorandum Opinion and Order granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff, a former tenure-track instructor of health and physical education at Northern State University, brought multiple discrimination and retaliation claims against the University and multiple officials after he was denied tenure due to insufficient scholarship. Leading up to this decision, plaintiff took 6 weeks of paid parental leave early in 2018, returning approximately a month before he was informed of his tenure denial. Plaintiff claimed that the University unlawfully interfered with his rights under the FMLA by declining to extend 12 weeks of paid leave. The court disagreed. Although FMLA permits eligible employees to take 12 weeks of leave, the leave need not be paid. Further, plaintiff never requested an additional 6 weeks, thus extinguishing any rights he may have otherwise had under the Act. However, the court permitted plaintiff to proceed on his FMLA retaliation claim based on disputed facts about whether plaintiff was denied tenure for insufficient scholarship, as the Tenure Committee represented, or whether shifting explanations about plaintiff’s collegiality coupled with animosity and controversy related to plaintiff’s parental leave “more likely motivated” the tenure decision. The court dismissed plaintiff’s Title IX claim for lack of an adequate comparator but permitted him to proceed in his First Amendment retaliation claim against the Dean.
Topics:
Academic Freedom & Employee Speech | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Faculty & Staff | Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) | Retaliation | Sex Discrimination | Sex Discrimination in Employment
Date:
5/26/2023
Dep.’t of Education Timing Update on Title IX Rulemaking (May 26, 2023)
U.S. Department of Education Timing Update on Title IX Rulemaking. In a blog posting, ED announced that it is updating its Spring Unified Agenda to reflect an anticipated October 2023 publication date for both the final Title IX rule and the final Athletics regulation.
Topics:
Athletics & Sports | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Employee Sexual Misconduct | Gender Equity in Athletics | Sex Discrimination | Students | Title IX & Student Sexual Misconduct

NACUA Annual Conference

Join us in the Music City June 29 – July 2 to connect, learn, and lead alongside higher education attorneys shaping policy, practice, and impact nationwide together.