In South Dakota, a teacher-student sexual harassment case survived the school district's motion for summary judgment. Consistent with other cases, the federal magistrate rejected the district's argument that other victims' complaints about this teacher in the past did not constitute actual notice of the teacher's harassment of this particular student plaintiff as a matter of law. The magistrate held that it is up to the jury to decide whether those prior complaints about the teacher put the district on notice of the teacher's propensity for harassing behavior and triggered an obligation to act reasonably to protect the students in his charge.
Decision is: Plamp v. Mitchell School District 7-12, 2008 WL 2277519 (D.S.D. June 3, 2008).
See also this story in the Mitchell Daily Republic.
An interdisciplinary resource for news, legal developments, commentary, and scholarship about Title IX, the federal statute prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex in federally funded schools.
Bad investigations
The more I learn about the ins and outs of Title IX (and Title VI) investigations, the more pessimistic I become about the ability of these...
-
Three former employees of Feather River College (Quincy, California) pressed their Title IX retaliation claims at a two-week hearing before...
-
In the wake of the Quinnipiac case, in which it seemed that the university somewhat spitefully cut men's track and field when it was tol...
-
The NCAA has come out with a very clear position on sexual relationships between coaches and student-athletes. They are wrong. They are a ...