Login
Home  |  Legal Resources  |  Publications

Cases & Developments

FILTERS

Find by DATE
Reset

Latest Cases & Developments

  • Date:

    Corbett v. Tex. Tech. Univ. Health Scis. Ctr. (N.D. Tex. July 10, 2023)

    Memorandum Opinion and Order granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.  Plaintiff, a former student in the Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center’s Anesthesiology Residency Program, brought discrimination and retaliation claims against the Center after she failed the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) Basic Exam four times and was dismissed from the program.  Plaintiff’s discrimination claim failed because her repeated failures on the ABA Exam prevented her from showing she was qualified for the position and because she identified no comparator who had failed as many times and was treated differently.  Her retaliation claim similarly failed because she presented no evidence to show that anything other than her failures on the ABA Exam were the cause of her dismissal.  The court permitted her hostile work environment claim to proceed, however, holding that plaintiff’s testimony that the Program Director made comments that he did not want women in the program on “at least 10 to 15 occasions” was sufficient to present a triable question as to whether the comments affected the conditions of her employment.   

    Topics:

    Academic Performance and Misconduct | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Retaliation | Sex Discrimination | Sex Discrimination in Employment | Students

  • Date:

    Kraft v. Tex. A&M Univ. (S.D. Tex. July 17, 2023)

    Opinion and Order granting Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.  Plaintiff, a former employee of the Transportation Services Department at Texas A&M University, brought a hostile work environment claim against the University and a former training supervisor after the training supervisor was terminated for surreptitiously placing a hidden camera in a women’s restroom.  Plaintiff also alleged that the former training supervisor had made sexualized comments and stared at her inappropriately.  In granting summary judgment in favor of the University, the court noted that plaintiff failed to establish (1) that the training supervisor had authority over her after her training period concluded or (2) that the University knew or should have known either of the camera or the alleged inappropriate behavior.   

    Topics:

    Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Employee Sexual Misconduct | Sex Discrimination | Sex Discrimination in Employment

  • Date:

    Williams v. Ala. State Univ. (M.D. Ala. July 19, 2023)

    Memorandum Opinion and Order granting Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment.  Plaintiff, a former Athletic Director at Alabama State University, brought Equal Pay Act and Title IX claims against the University after she left the University, and her successor was hired at a higher starting salary.  Plaintiff had a master’s degree and two years of athletics administrative experience when she was hired, and her successor had a Ph.D. and ten years of experience as an Athletic Director.  Plaintiff’s EPA claim failed because she was unable to show that the University’s explanation that they hoped to attract a “true executive” as her replacement was pretextual.  Turning to her Title IX claim and applying Title VII’s framework, the court similarly held that plaintiff was unable to show that the higher degree and greater relevant experience were pretext for a discriminatory motive.   

    Topics:

    Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Sex Discrimination | Sex Discrimination in Employment

  • Date:

    Ohio State Univ. v. Snyder-Hill (U.S. June 26, 2023)

    Order denying petition for certiorari.  Plaintiffs, who alleged they were among hundreds of male student-athletes at Ohio State University who were sexually abused over a period of many years beginning in 1978 by one-time athletic team doctor and university physician, brought Title IX claims against the University alleging that it was deliberately indifferent to the risk of the doctor’s abuse.  Plaintiffs assert that the University forced the doctor to retire in 1998 but did not reveal the allegations against him.  They further assert that when the doctor set up private practice near campus and advertised in the student newspaper, the University did not act to substantiate numerous additional complaints until 2018.  The district court dismissed plaintiffs’ claims as time-barred, but the Sixth Circuit reversed and remanded, holding they had plausibly alleged sufficient grounds to delay accrual.  In its June 26, 2023 Order List, the Supreme Court denied certiorari.  

    Topics:

    Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Employee Sexual Misconduct | Sex Discrimination | Students | Title IX & Student Sexual Misconduct

  • Date:

    Denham v. Ala. State Univ. (M.D. Ala. June 28, 2023)

    Opinion & Order granting Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment.  Plaintiff, a former professor of Occupational Therapy at Alabama State University who is a White female, brought discrimination claims against the University after she was not hired for an Associate Dean position.  In granting summary judgment to the University, the court first held that plaintiff’s assertion that the successful candidate was unqualified for the position did not establish pretext, noting that although he had only one year of teaching experience the University’s faculty handbook permitted it to hire a candidate with less than five years of teaching experience at the rank of Associate Professor if that individual was deemed to have sufficient experience in a relevant field.  The court further held that her assertion that the Provost’s explanation that the successful candidate “brought a lot of energy” to the interview also did not establish pretext, noting that the Provost also explained that he “spoke with ‘passion,’ particularly with respect to the role he could play as Associate Dean,” while plaintiff’s answer to why she wanted the position was “why not apply?”

    Topics:

    Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Race and National Origin Discrimination | Sex Discrimination | Sex Discrimination in Employment

  • Date:

    Kinnin v. Skidmore Coll. (2nd Cir. June 20, 2023)

    Order affirming summary judgment in favor of the University. Plaintiff, a former Director of User Services in the IT Department at Skidmore College, alleged discrimination and retaliation after she was terminated following a series of conflicts with colleagues, in part memorialized in an investigative report that found she had “a history of subjecting certain of her employees to her wrath for unknown reasons.” The Second Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of the College, finding that she identified no evidence to show that the report or the Vice President’s decision to terminate her for poor performance and poor management were motivated by discriminatory animus.  

    Topics:

    Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Retaliation | Sex Discrimination | Sex Discrimination in Employment

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