Emory University must face a lawsuit filed by a male student who claims he was mistreated during a hearing about sexual assault accusations against him, the Eleventh Circuit ruled. The court determined the student had provided sufficient details to suggest that the school’s sexual misconduct policy created an implied contract between them.
Emory Sex Assault Suit : Court’s Decision
In a published opinion on Thursday, a unanimous three-judge panel reversed the dismissal of the former Emory student’s breach-of-contract claims. The student, referred to as John Doe, alleged that the Atlanta university failed to adhere to its sexual misconduct policies during the investigation and hearing. Emory ultimately found Doe responsible for sexual misconduct and suspended him for a semester, which he claims cost him a lucrative job post-graduation.
Title IX Claim Dismissed
The appeals court, however, upheld the dismissal of Doe’s Title IX discrimination claim, stating he hadn’t shown that Emory was biased against him because of his gender. U.S. Circuit Judge Kevin C. Newsom wrote for the panel, noting, “Such bias isn’t necessarily suggestive of unlawful sex discrimination under Title IX because, of course, a complainant can be either male or female.”
Emory Sex Assault Suit : Allegations and Investigation
Doe’s complaint, filed in July 2021, claimed he had consensual sex with a female student at an April 2019 fraternity party. Six months later, the woman accused him of sexual assault and choking her with her belt. Doe contended that throughout the investigation, the woman’s story shifted, and she eventually admitted her belt was on the floor during the incident. Despite this, Emory presumed his guilt. The complaint also mentioned that an investigator’s report contained irrelevant and false information, portraying Doe as “the biggest stoner at Emory” and stating that female students were scared of him. Doe claimed that female witnesses were treated better than male witnesses during the hearing.
District Court and Appeals Panel
In September 2022, the district court dismissed his suit, ruling that his Title IX allegations could be explained by a pro-complainant bias rather than pro-female bias. It also found that his contract-based claims failed because he didn’t allege mutual agreement to the terms with Emory.
