Login
Home  |  Legal Resources  |  Publications

Cases & Developments

FILTERS

Find by DATE
Reset

Latest Cases & Developments

  • Date:

    Williams v. Morgan State Univ. (Md. Aug. 14, 2023)

    Opinion answering a certified question.  Plaintiff, a former Director of Broadcast Operations at Morgan State University, brought state-law wrongful termination and defamation claims and federal retaliation claims under the National Defense Authorization Act and the American Recovery Reinvestment Act against the University and multiple officials after she was terminated purportedly for alleging violations federal law.  The district court dismissed plaintiff’s federal claims, finding that the Maryland Tort Claims Act (MTCA) did not waive the State’s sovereign immunity with respect to the claims.  In answering a question certified to it by the Fourth Circuit, the Maryland Supreme Court held that “a tort action” under the MTCA does not include federal statutory claims, noting that “there is no evidence that the General Assembly intended to include federal statutory claims within the scope of the MTCA” and that a contrary approach “would produce results that are inconsistent with the MTCA’s main purposes.” 

    Topics:

    Faculty & Staff | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Retaliation | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    Doe v. Haverford Coll (E.D. Pa. Aug. 7, 2023)

    Memorandum granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.  Plaintiff is a recent graduate of Haverford College and a former co-captain of a varsity sports team.  Following rumors that he had sexually assaulted a female student, plaintiff, at his coach’s suggestion, emailed teammates that he would “briefly step away from the team,” but after the Title IX Office declined to open an investigation, the coach denied his request to rejoin the team, citing other players’ concerns.  Plaintiff brought contract, defamation, and Title IX claims against the College and his former coach.  The court permitted his contract claim against the college to proceed, finding he had sufficiently alleged a breach of the College’s Sexual Misconduct Policy, which stated that it would not impose a disciplinary sanction “arising from an allegation of Sexual Misconduct without holding a Hearing and permitting an Appeal, unless otherwise resolved through an Alternative Resolution Process.”  The court also permitted his defamation claim against the coach to proceed, finding that statements about the alleged assault and about plaintiff’s mental health made in a meeting with administrators and plaintiff’s co-captains were defamatory and that any determination that the statements were privileged or protected opinion was premature at this point.  It dismissed his Title IX claim, however, finding he had not alleged that he was excluded or harassed on the basis of his sex. 

    Topics:

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

  • Date:

    Edwards v. Cal. Univ. of Pa. (W.D. Pa. Aug. 4, 2023)

    Opinion granting-in-part and denying-in-part Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss. Plaintiff, the administrator of the estate of a football player at California University of Pennsylvania who died of COVID-19 in September 2020, brought substantive due process and state-law claims against the University, alleging that it took insufficient measures “to prevent or mitigate the spread of COVID-19” when it permitted student-athletes to return to campus for Fall 2020. In dismissing plaintiff’s substantive due process claims with prejudice, the court held that plaintiff failed to allege conduct that shocks the conscience, noted the numerous mitigation actions taken by the University mentioned in plaintiff’s factual allegations. The court deferred a decision on exercising supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff’s state-law claims pending consideration of claims against one defendant who did not appear in this action.  

    Topics:

    Campus Police, Safety, & Crisis Management | Constitutional Issues | Coronavirus | Due Process | Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    Askin v. Univ. of Notre Dame (Ky. Ct. App. July 28, 2023)

    Opinion affirming summary judgment in favor of the University. Plaintiff, a former football player at the University of Notre Dame in the 1980s and later in the NFL who suffers from chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), brought personal injury claims against the University, alleging that his CTE was the result of multiple concussions he experienced as a student-athlete. In affirming summary judgment in favor of the University, the Court of Appeals of Kentucky held that plaintiff’s claims were time barred, noting that under the discovery rule his claims accrued in 2014 when he was put on notice of the harm through a discussion with a pain management nurse of pending litigation with the NFL, rather than in 2018 when he was diagnosed with CTE. 

    Topics:

    Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration | Student Athlete Issues | Students | Tort Litigation

  • Date:

    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:

    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:

    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