Publication Sneak Peek

RECENT COURT DECISIONS: STUDENTS

Marfia v. Gettysburg Sch. Dist., U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Dec. 1, 2023)

A student sued a district and claimed that a teacher had groomed and sexually abused him in violation of Title IX. Beginning in second grade, since the student did not have a father figure in the home, the teacher arranged for the student to visit him at his home at night and on weekends, sometimes spending the night, gave him toys, sleeping in the same bed, and personally bathing him. Employees, parents, and others in the district knew about the teacher’s grooming behavior and complained to the administration, which took no meaningful action. The teacher became the student’s legal guardian after he turned ten years of age. The predatory grooming later escalated to sexual contact, including oral sex.

The district court denied the district’s request to dismiss the case, finding that the lawsuit established the district had actual notice of the teacher’s sexual harassment of the student and acted with deliberate indifference because of its unreasonable response to the complaints it received from other teachers and parents regarding the teacher’s inappropriate conduct with the student and other young boys.

Ogando v. Natal, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Nov. 27, 2023)

The family of a Hispanic student claimed that he was subjected to unlawful discrimination by suspending him after a fight with other students. None of the other students in the altercation were suspended. After complaining to the superintendent, the parents reported that the superintendent told them that the school district is in an affluent white area with few Hispanic students.

The district court dismissed the case, finding that the allegations of discrimination failed to contain any specific claims of intentional discrimination based on race.

Doe v. Rocky Mtn. Academy, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (Apr. 30, 2024)

A male student sued the district arguing that the district discriminated against him in violation of Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause when he was expelled from school for violating the school’s dress code by wearing earrings.

The district court dismissed the claims. On appeal, the circuit court reversed, concluding that the district court erred in dismissing the student’s equal protection claim because the district was not required to establish an exceedingly persuasive justification for its sex-based classification that allowed girls but not boys to wear earrings.