Login
Home  |  Legal Resources  |  Publications

Cases & Developments

FILTERS

Find by DATE
Reset

Latest Cases & Developments

  • Date:

    Glacier Nw., Inc. v. Int’l Brotherhood of Teamsters Local Union No. 174 (U.S. June 1, 2023)

    Opinion reversing the judgment of the Washington Supreme Court and remanding. Glacier Northwest, Inc. is a concrete company. On August 11, 2017, after multiple batches of concrete were loaded into ready-mix trucks and out for delivery, the Union representing Glacier’s truck drivers called a strike. At least 16 trucks returned to Glacier’s facility, forcing Glacier to dump the concrete to prevent it from hardening in the trucks. Glacier sued the Union for common law conversion and trespass to chattels, alleging that the Union intentionally destroyed the concrete. The trial court granted the Union’s Motion to Dismiss, finding the tort claims preempted by the National Labor Relations Act, and the Washington Supreme Court ultimately upheld. In reversing this judgment, the U.S. Supreme Court applied its Garmon preemption doctrine, which requires a party asserting preemption (1) to advance an interpretation of the NLRA that is not contrary to its language or the precedents of the courts or the NLRB and (2) to assert enough evidence to support a finding that the NLRA “arguably protects” the conduct at issue. Finding that “the Union took affirmative steps to endanger Glacier’s property rather than reasonable precautions to mitigate that risk,” the Court held that the NLRA does not “arguably protect” the Union’s conduct and, accordingly, that the NLRA does not preempt Glacier’s tort claims. 

    Topics:

    Collective Bargaining | Faculty & Staff | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    Brown v. Univ. of Rochester (N.Y. App. Div. May 18, 2023)

    Opinion affirming denial of defendants’ motions to dismiss. Plaintiff alleged that in 1984, when she was a 17-year-old freshman at the University of Rochester, she was raped by a resident of an on-campus fraternity house. Under New York’s Child Victims Act, plaintiff brought negligence claims against the University for allegedly failing to (1) supervise students, (2) institute policies to prevent fraternity members from serving alcohol to minors, and (3) properly investigate or notify authorities of the report of sexual misconduct. The trial court dismissed the third claim but permitted the others to proceed. In affirming, the New York Appellate Division held that “where, as here, a complaint alleges that a university received credible reports of ongoing and pervasive criminal conduct against students, perpetrated on campus by other students within the university’s control, the university had a legal duty to take appropriate responsive action.”  

    Topics:

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

  • Date:

    Monge v. Univ. of Pa., et al. (E.D. Pa. May 22, 2023)

    Memorandum granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania and curator at its Penn Museum, brought defamation, defamation by implication, false light, and civil aiding and abetting claims against the University, its former President, and former Provost related to a statement they issued to Museum employees in April 2021 concerning human remains that had been kept at the Museum from the 1985 police bombing of the MOVE house in Philadelphia. In dismissing plaintiff’s defamation, defamation by implication, and false light claims, the court held that (1) plaintiff is a limited public figure as to this topic because she used the remains in a course titled “Real Bones: Adventures in Forensic Anthropology” that she published in 2019 on the Coursera online platform and (2) she failed to plead actual malice. Turning to her claim that defendants aided and abetted various media outlets, reporters, and commentators also named as defendants in the case (Media Defendants) in publishing defamatory stories about her role in relation to the handling of the remains, the court held that plaintiff failed to allege they knew of or substantially assisted the Media Defendants in the alleged tortious conduct. In a related Memorandum, the court dismissed plaintiff’s claims against the Media Defendants.  

    Topics:

    Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    Runaway Records Prods. v. Franciscan Univ. of Steubenville (W.D. Pa. May 10, 2023)

    Memorandum Opinion granting-in-part and denying-in-part Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim. Plaintiff, a production company that entered into a three-year agreement in February 2020 to provide audiovisual and broadcasting services for the Franciscan University of Steubenville, including for in-person conferences, brought contract and conversion claims against the University, alleging that when it cancelled events due to the coronavirus pandemic and terminated its agreement with plaintiff, it retained and used equipment plaintiff had installed on campus. The University, in turn, brought contract and unjust enrichment counterclaims, alleging that it paid plaintiff for costs and equipment related to goods and services that plaintiff did not provide. In dismissing the University’s contract claim, the court held that plaintiff’s nonperformance was excused due to the nonoccurrence of the scheduled events, which were conditions precedent. It held, however, that the University adequately pleaded unjust enrichment in the alternative.  

    Topics:

    Campus Police, Safety, & Crisis Management | Contracts | Coronavirus | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    Chambers v. North Carolina Dep’t of Justice (4th Cir. Apr. 17, 2023)

    Opinion affirming-in-part, vacating-in-part, and remanding dismissal. Plaintiff, a former investigator in the Medicaid Investigations Division at the North Carolina Department of Justice who is African American, brought discrimination and wrongful termination claims under §1981 against the Department and two former supervisors after she was terminated. The district court dismissed plaintiff’s claim, finding her claims against the Department barred by sovereign immunity and her claims against her supervisors in their individual capacities time barred under North Carolina’s three-year limitations period for personal injury claims. The Fourth Circuit vacated and remanded as to her claims against her supervisors, noting (1) that in 1990 Congress enacted 28 U.S.C.§1658 to “establish a catchall four-year statute of limitations for federal claims ‘arising under’ any act of Congress … enacted after December 1, 1990” and (2) that in 1991, Congress “expanded §1981 to prohibit race discrimination post-contract formation, including in the termination of contract.”  

    Topics:

    Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Race and National Origin Discrimination

  • Date:

    Heineke v. Santa Clara Univ. (Cal. App. Apr. 27, 2023)

    Opinion affirming-in-part and vacating-in-part summary judgment in favor of the defendants. Plaintiff is a former tenured professor at Santa Clara University (SCU) who was terminated after a faculty judicial board (FJB) determined he sexually harassed a former teaching assistant, Jane Doe. He sought mandamus and injunctive relief and damages against SCU and brought defamation claims against both SCU and Doe. The California Court of Appeals affirmed denial of the writ of mandate, finding that although the Faculty Handbook was unclear about procedures for student-teacher sexual harassment cases, plaintiff received a fair hearing, and his termination was supported by substantial evidence. It affirmed summary judgment in favor of SCU on his wrongful termination and contract claims, finding no evidence supporting his claim of discrimination and no procedural irregularities sufficient to show breach of contract. Turning to his defamation claims, the court held that Doe’s complaint, the investigation, and an independent investigator’s report are all subject to the litigation privilege for quasi-judicial proceedings. It reversed summary judgment, however, as to statements Doe made to a witness prior to her complaint, which plaintiff testified were fabrications. This, the court held, created a triable question as to whether (1) Doe knew the statements were false and (2) the common-interest privilege she asserted over them was negated by malice.  

    Topics:

    Constitutional Issues | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Due Process | Employee Sexual Misconduct | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Sex Discrimination | 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