STUDENT AND EDUCATOR RIGHTS LITIGATION

CLICK TO CALL

When exploring options for possible legal action against a school, it is very important to consider the experience a law firm has in litigating cases, specifically cases against schools and universities. The law affords schools and universities immunity from many state and federal claims, a variety of legal defenses, and important limitations on the damages available at trial (e.g. money). Navigating around these obstacles takes deliberate planning and years of experience. Since 2014, our firm has focused specifically on litigating claims against schools and universities. We have appeared in courts throughout the United States. Below are some representative cases we have handled.

REPRESENTATIVE EDUCATION LITIGATION*

Caden Cox v. Hocking College, et al.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 2023
Mark Weiker; Amy Solaro; Jessica Moore
Federal claims for ADA and 504 discrimination and retaliation filed on behalf of a former college student-athlete and campus employee with Down Syndrome who was subjected to assault and disability discrimination by his supervisor. The student then suffered retaliation for reporting the claims to college administrators.

John Doe 1 v. Gallia County Local School District, et al.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 2023
Mark Weiker; Jessica Moore; Leesburg Tuttle
Initial claims filed for first victim. Federal and state law claims based on childhood sexual assault by former cheerleading coach, facilitated by her then-husband, the HS wrestling coach, plus Title IX deliberate indifferent claims against former school administrators and the Board of Education based on the school’s failure to act on prior reports of abuse by the same couple.

John Doe 2 v. Gallia County Local School District, et al.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 2023
Mark Weiker; Jessica Moore; Leesburg Tuttle
Second complaint filed for second victim. Federal and state law claims based on childhood sexual assault by former cheerleading coach, facilitated by her then-husband, the HS wrestling coach, plus Title IX deliberate indifferent claims against former school administrators and the Board of Education based on the school’s failure to act on prior reports of abuse by the same couple.

John Doe 3 v. Gallia County Local School District, et al.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 2023
Mark Weiker; Jessica Moore; Leesburg Tuttle
Third complaint filed for third victim. Federal and state law claims based on childhood sexual assault by former cheerleading coach, facilitated by her then-husband, the HS wrestling coach, plus Title IX deliberate indifferent claims against former school administrators and the Board of Education based on the school’s failure to act on prior reports of abuse by the same couple.

John Doe 4 v. Gallia County Local School District, et al.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 2023
Mark Weiker; Jessica Moore; Leesburg Tuttle
Fourth complaint filed for fourth victim. Federal and state law claims based on childhood sexual assault by former cheerleading coach, facilitated by her then-husband, the HS wrestling coach, plus Title IX deliberate indifferent claims against former school administrators and the Board of Education based on the school’s failure to act on prior reports of abuse by the same couple.

John Doe 5 v. Gallia County Local School District, et al.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 2023
Mark Weiker; Jessica Moore; Leesburg Tuttle
Fifth complaint filed for fifth victim. Federal and state law claims based on childhood sexual assault by former cheerleading coach, facilitated by her then-husband, the HS wrestling coach, plus Title IX deliberate indifferent claims against former school administrators and the Board of Education based on the school’s failure to act on prior reports of abuse by the same couple.

Jane Doe 1 v. Gallia County Local School District, et al.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 2023
Mark Weiker; Jessica Moore; Leesburg Tuttle
Sixth complaint filed for sixth victim. Federal and state law claims based on childhood sexual assault by former cheerleading coach, facilitated by her then-husband, the HS wrestling coach, plus Title IX deliberate indifferent claims against former school administrators and the Board of Education based on the school’s failure to act on prior reports of abuse by the same couple.

T.M. v. Detroit Public Schools Community District
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, 2023
Liz Abdnour; Renee Stromski; Cocounsel: Jacquelyn Kmetz
Litigation filed on behalf of a disabled former high school student who was denied appropriate special education services and discriminated against based on her disability. After waiting more than 600 days to receive a decision in her special education due process administrative hearing - ten times the statutorily ordered timeline - the hearing officer found that T.M. had not been deprived a free and appropriate public education, despite graduating with the ability to read and do math at third grade levels. Claims include violations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Michigan's Persons with Disabilities Civil Rights Act.

D.L., et al. v. Michigan Department of Education
U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan, 2022
Liz Abdnour; Cocounsel: Disability Rights Michigan, Salvatore Prescott Porter & Porter, and MI AECRES
Litigation filed on behalf of former students with disabilities in Kalamazoo Public Schools who suffered substantial academic harm and lost educational experience and opportunity due to the Michigan Department of Education’s systemic failure to monitor and remedy KPS’s known and continuous violations of state and federal laws regarding the identification and education of students with disabilities. MDE’s charge is to oversee, supervise and enforce the provision of FAPE to Michigan’s students with disabilities. With Plaintiffs and many other students, MDE has failed to do so, resulting in substantial harm to, among other things, Plaintiffs’ educational experience and opportunity, academic and intellectual progress, and future earning capacity.

G.T., as Parent and Legal Guardian of Jane Doe, a Minor, v. Walled Lake Consolidated School District, et al.
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, 2022
Liz Abdnour
Litigation filed on behalf of a middle school student with disabilities who was repeatedly sexually harassed and stalked by a peer via sexually explicit photographs and text messages sent to her cell phone. After reporting the harassment to her school, which did not respond appropriately, the student's abuser cornered her in a "quiet room" at school. When she tried to defend herself from her abuser, the district suspended her from school without a hearing, causing her to miss months of her education and to need psychiatric hospitalization. Claims include violations of Title IX, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fourteenth Amendment, and state civil rights laws. This matter was resolved via a confidential settlement agreement. SETTLED, May 2023.

Owens, et al. v. Louisiana State University, et al.
U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, 2021
Liz Abdnour; Cocounsel: Katie Lasky Law
Litigation filed on behalf of women and LGBTQ+ individuals who survived sexual assault, sexual harassment, domestic violence, and stalking on campus and were systematically failed by the Louisiana State University Title IX office, athletics department, and administration. The complaint alleges Title IX and other civil rights claims. SETTLED, Mar. 2024.

Place v. Warren Local School District, et al.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 2021
Mark Weiker; Jessica Moore
Litigation brought on behalf of an accomplished former female high school basketball player who was removed from the basketball team her senior year because of complaints made about her coach by the student and her parents. The complaint alleges First Amendment retaliation and other federal and state law claims.

Jane Doe v. University of Nebraska, et al.
U.S. District Court, District of Nebraska, 2021
Liz Abdnour; Megan Mitchell
Litigation filed on behalf of a survivor of years-long sexual harassment, stalking by her former advisor, which continued even after she left Nebraska to start her graduate studies over at another institution out of state and which caused significant injury to her reputation and career. The complaint alleges Title IX, breach of contract, and other civil rights and tort claims. On January 5, 2022, the court issued an order denying defendants' motion to dismiss multiple claims, including, importantly, the survivor's claims of violations of her constitutional due process rights. This is an argument made regularly with respect to respondents in Title IX proceedings, but has rarely succeeded when argued on behalf of victims.

Chisholm v. St. Marys City School District Board of Education, et al.
U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio, 2016; Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, 2020 (Mark Weiker)
Litigation filed against football coach, administrators and school district for persistent and pervasive sex-based harassment of high school football palyers under Title IX, including claims for violations of constitutional due process and related state law claims.

Jane Doe 1, et al. v. University of Nebraska
U.S. District Court, District of Nebraska, 2020
Liz Abdnour; Megan Mitchell
Litigation filed on behalf of seven female students at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln who were systematically denied their rights in the Title IX reporting and investigation process. The complaint alleges Title IX, breach of contract, and other civil rights and tort claims. The U.S. Department of Justice filed a Statement of Interest in the case on June 11, 2021.

Student A v. Village Academy School, et al.
Delaware County Court of Common Pleas, Ohio, 2019 (Mark Weiker)
Discovery complaint filed against private school and administrator alleging ADA and 504 violations for disability discrimination based on student’s dismissal from the school because of disability. Matter resolved privately and dismissed.

Student One v. Wright State University, et al.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 2018 (Mark Weiker)
Litigation filed against state university for claims of First Amendment Retaliation, ADA discrimination and related state disability discrimination claims. Private agreement reached to resolve litigation.

Jane Doe v. Finneytown Local School District, et al.
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 2018
Liz Abdnour; Cocounsel: Cook, Allen & Logothetis
Litigation filed on behalf of a middle school student with a disability who was sexually assaulted, repeatedly sexually harassed, and severely bullied, including being repeatedly told to kill herself, at school. The school failed to initiate an appropriate Title IX response or protect her from her tormentors, leading her to decompensate physically and emotionally until she had to be hospitalized. The complaint alleges Title IX, tort, and other civil rights claims and seeks injunctive relief. On November 16, 2021, the court issued an order denying defendants' motion to dismiss multiple claims, including, most notably, the victim's claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress - a claim that rarely survives a motion to dismiss in a Title IX-related matter. SETTLED, Jan. 2023.

Jane Doe v. Unnamed higher education institution
Liz Abdnour
Complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, with regard to the school's violations of Title IX in its investigation and hearing on Doe's report of sexual assault by another student. SETTLED, Mar. 2022.

EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION

Poitra v. Michigan State University, et al.
U.S. District Court, Western District of Michigan, 2022
Liz Abdnour
Litigation filed on behalf of Dr. Christie Poitra, the Interim Director of the Native American Institute at MSU, who was harassed and retaliated against for years by her direct supervisor before going through an investigation and hearing through MSU's Office for Civil Rights and Title IX Education and Compliance. When the investigation finally concluded, over 500 days after she filed her complaint, MSU found the respondent in violation of University policy for sexually harassing Poitra, but only sanctioned him with four weeks of unpaid leave. After that, Poitra continued to experience retaliation from new supervisors. The complaint alleges violations of Title VII, Title IX, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, and other civil rights claims. SETTLED, Dec. 2023.

CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE

John Doe(s) v. Gallia County Local School District, et al. (see above)
U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, 2023
Mark Weiker; Jessica Moore; Leesburg Tuttle
Claims filed for multiple victims. Federal and state law claims based on childhood sexual assault by former cheerleading coach, facilitated by her then-husband, the HS wrestling coach, plus Title IX deliberate indifferent claims against former school administrators and the Board of Education based on the school’s failure to act on prior reports of abuse by the same couple.

John Doe EAL1 v. University of Michigan
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, 2022
Liz Abdnour
Lawsuit filed on behalf of a survivor of sexual abuse by serial perpetrator Robert Anderson at the University of Michigan. The survivor was a member of the UM football team in the late 1970s and was repeatedly subjected to sexual assault by Anderson during medical appointments, leading to severe lifelong harm including depression, difficulty in romantic and sexual relationships, and shame. The complaint alleges violations of Title IX, the Fourteenth Amendment, Michigan's Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, and tort claims. SETTLED, Jan. 2023.

DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION

Babcock, et al. v. State of Michigan, et al.
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, 2022
Liz Abdnour; Renee Stromski; Cocounsel: Michael W. Bartnik
Lawsuit filed on behalf of three disabled individuals who were repeatedly denied access to government and municipal buildings and their facilities, including restrooms, due to accessibility issues and failures to comply with building code, the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Michigan's Persons with Disabilities Civil Rights Act. The plaintiffs include two attorneys whose work and ability to practice law has been negatively impacted by the failures.

RACE DISCRIMINATION

Reed v. Lansing Police Department, et al.
Ingham County Circuit Court, Michigan, 2021
Liz Abdnour
Lawsuit filed on behalf of a then-sixteen year old child who was beaten by Lansing police while being arrested. No deescalation tactics were used and the officers moved immediately to assaulting the child, including punching her and slamming her leg in a the door of a police cruiser, while she was having an emotional breakdown due to the trauma of the attack. The complaint alleged race discrimination, due process and equal protection violations, excessive use of force, and other civil rights and tort claims. SETTLED, Apr. 2022.

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

Abdnour v. Michigan State University
Michigan Court of Claims, 2020
Liz Abdnour
Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed against Michigan State University for failure to comply with Michigan law in responding to a public records request. MSU not only failed to disclose information and documents as required by statute, but also failed to properly justify its redactions as required by Michigan case law. The complaint alleged violations of Michigan's Freedom of Information Act. Plaintiff prevailed on her claims and MSU was ordered to pay costs and attorneys fees. RULING IN PLAINTIFF’S FAVOR, May 2022.

Jane Doe v. Unnamed higher education institution
Liz Abdnour
Successful FOIA appeal on behalf of a sexual assault survivor who requested that her school provide her with a copy of her Title IX investigation report as required by federal law. Her initial request was denied by the school, which wrongly cited FOIA to justify its failure to provide her with a copy of the report. APPEAL GRANTED, Apr. 2021.

*The cases filed above and/or the outcomes in those cases are not necessarily indicative of what could be expected in any other matter, as the circumstances of each case are unique and involve multiple factors to consider whether valid legal claims exist and what outcomes are possible.

CLICK TO CALL FOR A CASE EVALUATION

- OR -

Complete the form below and you WILL be contacted by our Intake Coordinator.

First and Last Name

Email

Phone

(###)

###

####

Address

Message