Blog

Student Sues University, Coach for Failure to Enforce Title IX Protections

Posted by Joseph D. Lento | Jun 28, 2020 | 0 Comments


Last month, a female track athlete named University of Michigan school officials and her track coach in a federal lawsuit, claiming they failed to protect her from contact with another student who had previously been disciplined for sexual misconduct under Title IX provisions.

As ESPN reports, the original dispute dated back to May 2017, when athlete Kellen Smith first reported to the school's Title IX office that her male teammate, Blake Washington, had touched her inappropriately without her consent in April 2017. She also reported the incident to the police in August 2017. According to reports, Smith was asleep at the time of the alleged contact and discovered she had been violated through a series of text messages Washington had sent describing the incident after the fact. (Washington maintains the contact was consensual.)

Although prosecutors ultimately declined to charge Washington due to Smith having no direct recollection of the event, the university found Washington responsible for sexual misconduct in January of 2018 and issued a no-contact directive. It is this directive Smith alleges the school failed to enforce.

In the federal lawsuit, Smith specifically names her coach James Henry for failures to keep Washington away from her, alleging instead that Henry claimed she should be “flattered” by Washington's interest in her and that she "could always quit the team if she wanted to avoid being around Mr. Washington." Smith also cites that the stress generated by these failures resulted in dropping grades, missed practices, and ultimately losing her spot on the track team.

Implications and Takeaways

This lawsuit, and more importantly the allegations and backstory behind it, offer some important teaching points about how schools and the courts are interpreting Title IX provisions. In particular, let's look at three of the most important takeaways.

· The male athlete was cited for sexual misconduct by the school even though prosecutors couldn't derive enough evidence for a criminal charge. In essence, the initial alleged incident was basically her word against his as to whether the event was consensual, with little backing evidence to support either point. The state found insufficient evidence to prosecute; the school found the accused in violation almost solely on the word of the accuser. This underscores the fact that schools don't always follow the same standards of due process as the courts, especially under the threat of Title IX.

· The new lawsuit brings up important questions about who is responsible for Title IX enforcement. Specifically: does a school's no-contact directive carry the same weight of legal authority as, say, a restraining order? Can school officials, especially teachers or coaches in direct contact with a student, be held liable if another student breaks a no-contact rule? The findings of this case will attempt to answer these questions, and it could have significant implications for how Title IX is enforced in the future.

· Accusations of Title IX violations can have severe repercussions for the accused, even with limited evidence. Considering the male athlete may genuinely have seen the contact as consensual, a single allegation has already created three years of stigma for that student, with no end in sight.

If anything, this case serves as a cautionary tale that even an allegation of wrongdoing under Title IX could have lasting implications for the future. If you have been wrongly accused, the help of an attorney-advisor can provide much-needed protection in school disciplinary proceedings. Call attorney Joseph D. Lento and the Lento Law Firm at 888-535-3686 for a case evaluation, or reach out to us online.

About the Author

Joseph D. Lento

"I pride myself on having heart and driving hard to get results!" Joseph D. Lento has more than a decade of experience passionately fighting for the futures of his clients. Mr. Lento represents students and others in disciplinary cases and other proceedings at universities and colleges across the United States while concurrently fighting in criminal courtrooms in Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania counties, and New Jersey. Mr. Lento has helped countless students, professors, and others in academia at more than a thousand universities and colleges across the United States. He does not settle for the easiest outcome, and instead prioritizes his clients' needs and well-being. Joseph D. Lento is licensed in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, and is admitted pro hac vice as needed nationwide.

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Contact Us Today!

footer-2.jpg

If you, or your student, are facing any kind of disciplinary action, or other negative academic sanction, and are having feelings of uncertainty and anxiety for what the future may hold, contact our offices today, and let us help secure your academic career.

This website was created only for general information purposes. It is not intended to be construed as legal advice for any situation. Only a direct consultation with a licensed Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York attorney can provide you with formal legal counsel based on the unique details surrounding your situation. The pages on this website may contain links and contact information for third party organizations – the Lento Law Firm does not necessarily endorse these organizations nor the materials contained on their website. In Pennsylvania, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout Pennsylvania's 67 counties, including, but not limited to Philadelphia, Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, Berks, Lancaster, Lehigh, and Northampton County. In New Jersey, attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New Jersey's 21 counties: Atlantic, Bergen, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Essex, Gloucester, Hudson, Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Ocean, Passaic, Salem, Somerset, Sussex, Union, and Warren County, In New York, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New York's 62 counties. Outside of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, unless attorney Joseph D. Lento is admitted pro hac vice if needed, his assistance may not constitute legal advice or the practice of law. The decision to hire an attorney in Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania counties, New Jersey, New York, or nationwide should not be made solely on the strength of an advertisement. We invite you to contact the Lento Law Firm directly to inquire about our specific qualifications and experience. Communicating with the Lento Law Firm by email, phone, or fax does not create an attorney-client relationship. The Lento Law Firm will serve as your official legal counsel upon a formal agreement from both parties. Any information sent to the Lento Law Firm before an attorney-client relationship is made is done on a non-confidential basis.

Menu