Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
JANE DOE )
)
Plaintiff, )
) Action No. 5:15-cv-00296-JMH
v. )
)
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY ) MEMORANDUM OPINION
) AND ORDER
Defendant. )
)
)
** ** ** ** **
assault in October 2014. [DE 1]. Defendant has moved the Court to
matter [DE 5]. Plaintiff responded to the motion [DE 9], Defendant
replied [DE 10], and the motion is ripe for decision. Having
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
against Student B.
1
Sometime after the alleged assault, a pair of students visited Plaintiffs
dorm room to inquire if she was raped. Also, two comments were posted on a
picture that Plaintiff had uploaded to her Instagram account. Specifically, the
social media comments stated, Your ex got arrested for rape charges, and
asked, Dnt [sic] u [sic] know him? These facts, while not determinative of
the outcome, are listed here to be considered among the various facts Plaintiff
has pled.
2
Case: 5:15-cv-00296-JMH Doc #: 12 Filed: 08/31/16 Page: 3 of 12 - Page ID#: 150
his request, and consequently, Student B was not present for his
rights by the hearing panel and setting aside the hearing panels
hearing, the UAB reversed the decision of the second hearing panel
BCTC campus but [t]he notice of a third hearing caused Jane Does
that she withdrew from classes again on March 12, 2015 [DE 1,
Comp. 32].
3
Case: 5:15-cv-00296-JMH Doc #: 12 Filed: 08/31/16 Page: 4 of 12 - Page ID#: 151
reflect that the University took any further action in this matter
after the June 9, 2015 UAB opinion. Plaintiff filed this action
521 F2d 555, 559 (6th Cir. 2008). The Court is not bound to accept
liable for the misconduct alleged. Id. (citing Twombly, 550 U.S.
at 556).
4
Case: 5:15-cv-00296-JMH Doc #: 12 Filed: 08/31/16 Page: 5 of 12 - Page ID#: 152
Bd. of Educ., 526 U.S. 629, 639 (1999), the Supreme Court held
for injunctive relief and money damages [Def.s Mem. Supp. Mot.
Dismiss, pg. 16-17, DE 5-1]. See Franks v. Kentucky Sch. for the
argues that to the extent Plaintiff makes any claims that are
5
Case: 5:15-cv-00296-JMH Doc #: 12 Filed: 08/31/16 Page: 6 of 12 - Page ID#: 153
Hoben, 195 F.3d 845, 854 (6th Cir., 1999) (summarizing the holding
in Davis v. Monroe County Bd. of Educ., 526 U.S. 629 (1999)). The
school" Soper, 195 F.3d 845, 855 (6th Cir. 1999). Thus, Plaintiff
to the assault.
System of Georgia, 477 F.3d 1282, 1293 (11th Cir. 2007) (finding
had stated a claim under Title IX). Plaintiff does not allege that
6
Case: 5:15-cv-00296-JMH Doc #: 12 Filed: 08/31/16 Page: 7 of 12 - Page ID#: 154
dismiss.
2This is not the first time that the Court has been made aware of Constitutional
deprivations in the Universitys student disciplinary proceedings. See Doe v.
Hazard, 152 F.Supp.3d 859, (E.D. Ky. Jan. 2015). While those deprivations have
been corrected by the Universitys internal appellate process, the Court
suggests it is time for the University to get its act together. The Court hopes
the Universitys General Counsel, his staff, and the many lawyers at the college
of law can somehow come up with a procedure that does not result in multiple
7
Case: 5:15-cv-00296-JMH Doc #: 12 Filed: 08/31/16 Page: 8 of 12 - Page ID#: 155
as well).
Sch. Dist., 231 F.3d 253, 260 (6th Cir. 2000). The Court agrees
pled show the University took significant action and did not act
8
Case: 5:15-cv-00296-JMH Doc #: 12 Filed: 08/31/16 Page: 9 of 12 - Page ID#: 156
explain the four months between the third UAB decision and the
9
Case: 5:15-cv-00296-JMH Doc #: 12 Filed: 08/31/16 Page: 10 of 12 - Page ID#: 157
See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678-79, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949-
IV. ABSTENTION
from proceeding with this case. The Court disagrees and holds
v. Jacobs, 134 S.Ct. 588 (2013); Huffman v. Pursue, Ltd., 420 U.S.
592 (1975); Pennzoil Co. v. Texaco Inc., 481 U.S. 1 (1987). The
10
Case: 5:15-cv-00296-JMH Doc #: 12 Filed: 08/31/16 Page: 11 of 12 - Page ID#: 158
Doe v. Hazard, 152 F.Supp.3d 859, (E.D. Ky. Jan. 2015) (in which
rights.
which this case does not neatly fit. It is not the federal
11
Case: 5:15-cv-00296-JMH Doc #: 12 Filed: 08/31/16 Page: 12 of 12 - Page ID#: 159
not extended to victims, and her claims in this matter are against
The Court concludes that the facts of this case do not fit
comply with federal law under Title IX. [DE 1, Comp. pg. 11].
decided at a later time. For the reasons stated above, the Court
equitable relief.
V. CONCLUSION
is DENIED.
12