Login
Home  |  Legal Resources  |  Publications

Cases & Developments

FILTERS

Find by DATE
Reset

Latest Cases & Developments

  • Date:

    Adams v. The Vanderbilt Univ. (M.D. Tenn. Mar. 19, 2024)

    Memorandum Opinion granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiffs, the parents of a student at Vanderbilt University who died by suicide, brought negligence, disability discrimination, and contract claims against the University, after the student made suicide attempts in Fall 2020 and Spring 2021 before his passing in Summer 2021, all in University dormitory rooms. In dismissing plaintiffs’ wrongful death claim, the court declined to find a “special relationship and resulting affirmative duty of care … where a university requires a student to live on campus, the student has reported suicidal thoughts to the university, and the student has previously attempted suicide,” noting that no Tennessee court has recognized such a duty and under an “Erie-guess” the Supreme Court of Tennessee was unlikely to do so. In dismissing their disability discrimination claims, the court noted the lack of allegation that the student had ever requested an accommodation. In dismissing their contract claim, the court found no factual allegations of an express contract or breach of an implied contract created by the student-university relationship.

    Topics:

    Campus Police, Safety, & Crisis Management | Disability Discrimination | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Distressed & Suicidal Students | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Students | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    Erikson v. Xavier Univ. (S.D. Ohio Mar. 18, 2024)

    Order denying Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. Plaintiff, a former tenured Associate Professor of Art at Xavier University, brought (1) gender discrimination claims against the University after it terminated him for alleged sexual misconduct and (2) defamation claims against his complainant. The alleged assault took place at plaintiff’s off-campus home, the complainant was an alumna of the University who had no other connection with the University at the time, and she filed her complaint outside of the two-year statute of limitations in the University’s Harassment Code and Accountability Procedures (HCAP). In permitting his Title VII discrimination claim to proceed, the court found plaintiff had sufficiently alleged that members of his hearing panel (1) expressed moral disapproval of him as a male for having intercourse without a condom and (2) attributed an imbalance of power in the encounter based on plaintiff’s position at the University, as well as his societal status as a male. Turning to his Title IX claim, the court found plaintiff sufficiently alleged that the University erroneously terminated him under the HCAP for conduct beyond the policy’s scope and that the alleged comments about plaintiff’s status as a male were sufficient to connect procedural irregularities to potential gender bias. In permitting his defamation claim against the complainant to proceed, the court found plaintiff sufficiently alleged that her statements were made with actual malice to overcome a defense of qualified privilege.

    Topics:

    Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Sex Discrimination | Sex Discrimination in Employment | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    Doe v. The Univ. of N.C. Sys. (W.D. N.C. Mar. 4, 2024)

    Memorandum of Decision and Order granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. Plaintiff, a former student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and recipient of an independently funded full scholarship, brought Title IX, due process, contract, and tort claims against the University and numerous officials after he was expelled for alleged sexual misconduct. Plaintiff alleged that he did not receive proper notification of the accusations, that he was not allowed to cross-examine his four accusers, that evidence was withheld from him and exculpatory evidence was not considered, and that investigators and members of hearing panels showed gender bias. The court found the factual allegations sufficient for plaintiff to proceed on his Title IX erroneous outcome, due process, and contract claims. The court also found the alleged procedural flaws sufficient to state a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress claim, but it found no allegation that the flaws were intended to inflict emotional distress. The court also permitted plaintiff to proceed on his tortious interference with a contract claim, finding that he had sufficiently alleged that the University had communicated information about the flawed disciplinary proceedings to the foundation funding his scholarship.   

    Topics:

    Constitutional Issues | Due Process | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Students | Title IX & Student Sexual Misconduct | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    Boje v. Mercyhurst Univ. (W.D. Pa. Mar. 6, 2024)

    Memorandum Opinion granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff, a former student at Mercyhurst University, on behalf of himself and a putative class, brought negligence and related state-law claims against the University after he received notice in late 2022 that his personally identifiable information was compromised in a data breach earlier that year and was offered twelve months of credit monitoring protection. In granting the University’s motion to dismiss, the court held that plaintiff lacked standing, finding that without an allegation that he had suffered actual identity theft or facts suggesting that misuse was imminent (such as publication of his data on the Dark Web) plaintiff failed to allege injury in fact. The court then remanded the matter to the state court.

    Topics:

    Data Privacy | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Privacy & Transparency | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    Doe v. Brandeis Univ. (D. Mass. Feb. 22, 2024)

    Memorandum & Order granting Defendants’ Partial Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff, a student at Brandeis University, brought gender and disability discrimination, contract, negligence, and negligent infliction of emotional distress claims against the University, its Title IX Coordinator, and the investigator assigned to his case, after he was investigated for alleged dating violence. The court granted the University’s partial motion to dismiss plaintiff’s negligence claims, noting that his claims sound in contract rather than tort. The court also denied plaintiff leave to amend his complaint to add negligent supervision and defamation claims, finding that (1) he offered no specific facts to support his assertion of negligent training or supervision, and (2) statements in the investigative report to which he objected were the investigator’s opinion and cannot support a defamation claim.   

    Topics:

    Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Students | Title IX & Student Sexual Misconduct | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    ACE Amicus Brief in Zhang v. Emory Univ. (Feb. 22, 2024)

    Amicus Brief from the American Council on Education (ACE) and 16 other higher education associations in Zhang v. Emory University. Plaintiffs-Appellants, the parents of a 17-year-old student at Emory University who died by suicide, brought negligence claims against the University alleging that it knew or should have known that their son was at risk of suicide. After permitting limited plausibility discovery, the district court granted the University’s motion to dismiss, finding conclusory an allegation that an instructor knew that the student appeared to be suicidal prior to when he passed away. Through this amicus brief, the associations ask the Eleventh Circuit to affirm dismissal and decline to find that a university may be liable “on a negligence-based theory for a student’s suicide where there are no well-pled facts showing that the university had any knowledge that the student was considering suicide or self-harm.” The brief argues that to impose such a duty would be both inconsistent with the expectation held even by students who matriculate before the age of 18 that they be treated as autonomous adults with protected privacy interests and would otherwise hinder the higher education community’s progress in removing stigma associated with seeking mental health care.

    Topics:

    Campus Police, Safety, & Crisis Management | Disability Discrimination | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Distressed & Suicidal Students | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Students | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    MacTaggart, et al. v. President & Fellows of Harvard Coll. (Sup. Ct. Mass. Feb. 12, 2024)

    Decision and Order allowing Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. Plaintiffs, 47 close relatives of individuals who donated their bodies to Harvard Medical School (HMS) for teaching purposes, in cases consolidated for pre-trial purposes, brought negligence and related claims against Harvard, two officials who managed the HMS Anatomical Gift Program, and Harvard’s former morgue manager after the former morgue manager was indicted in a scheme to steal and sell dissected portions of the cadavers prior to cremation and return to their families. In granting the motions to dismiss filed by Harvard and the managers of its Anatomical Gift Program, the court found no plausible allegation that these defendants failed to act in good faith and that they are, accordingly, entitled to qualified statutory immunity under the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act.   

    Topics:

    Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    Delaney v. Syracuse Univ. (N.Y. App. Div. Feb. 9, 2024)

    Order and Memorandum reversing dismissal and reinstating the complaint. Plaintiff sued Syracuse University seeking to recover damages for injuries he sustained when he fell off his motorized bicycle while riding on an allegedly defective sidewalk on the University campus. The trial court dismissed the complaint under New York’s recreational use statute. In reversing and reinstating the complaint, the Appellate Division held the statute was inapplicable, noting that although bicycle riding is one of the enumerated activities, plaintiff had sufficiently alleged that the sidewalk where he fell was situated between a busy roadway and a building entrance, not otherwise appropriate for recreational use.  

    Topics:

    Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    Ellis v. Pa. State Univ. (Ct. Common Pleas, Philadelphia Cnty. Jan. 30, 2024)

    Jury verdict finding the University not negligent. Plaintiff, the Estate of Natasha E. Ellis, brought negligence claims against Penn State University and multiple individuals after Ellis and a friend, neither of whom were University students, consumed alcohol at a party at a student apartment community serving the University’s Abington campus, left on the friend’s motorcycle, and were involved in an accident that resulted in Ellis’s death. Plaintiff asserted that the University or its agents knew or should have known that the friend was too intoxicated to operate the motorcycle safely. While the jury found the University was not negligent, it determined that both the friend who operated the motorcycle and the host of the party at which the alcohol was consumed acted negligently and thus, awarded plaintiff $6,381,812.00 in damages against those two parties.   

    Topics:

    Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    McGowan v. S. Methodist Univ. (N.D. Tex. Feb. 5, 2024)

    Memorandum Opinion and Order granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs, nine former members of the women-only rowing team at Southern Methodist University, brought Title IX and negligence claims against the University alleging that it provided inferior resources to female rowers and that due to inadequate coaching, training, and medical treatment they all suffered the same type of hip injury. The court granted summary judgment in favor of the University with respect to eight of the nine plaintiffs on the grounds that their tort and Title IX claims are time-barred. Turning to plaintiffs’ request for compensatory damages, the court granted the University’s motion with respect to pain and suffering, emotional and psychological harm, and loss of quality of life, finding those types of relief unavailable after Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C. It permitted the sole remaining plaintiff to proceed, however, in her request for compensatory damages for medical expenses for personal injury as well as for loss of educational opportunities and benefits. 

    Topics:

    Athletics & Sports | Gender Equity in Athletics | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Tort Litigation

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.

Register