Title IX lawsuit filed against UAH

The federal lawsuit filed against UAH by a female student claiming she was sexually assaulted by a school hockey player.
of 15
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
  IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMANORTHEASTERN DIVISIONJANE DOE,))Plaintiff,))vs.)CV:)THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA)in HUNTSVILLE, BRENT WREN, )PhD., Sgt. JOHN BESWICK  , and)REGINA YOUNG HYATT, PhD.,))Defendants.)COMPLAINT COMES NOW the plaintiff, by and through her undersigned counsel and files her complaint against the above-named defendants and states unto the Court as follows: I.NATURE OF THE ACTION 1.This is an action for injunctive relief and damages against the defendants for discrimination on the basis of sex in violation of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972,20 U.S.C. § 1681,  et seq , the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the UnitedStates Constitution, via 42 USC § 1983, and pendant state law claims. II.PARTIES 2.Plaintiff, Jane Doe, (hereinafter sometimes “Doe”) is an adult resident of MadisonCounty, Alabama, and a student at the University of Alabama, Huntsville.3.The University of Alabama in Huntsville (hereinafter “UAH”) is a publicuniversity located in Huntsville, Alabama, and is a recipient of federal educational funds. 4.Brent Wren, PhD (hereinafter “Wren”), is an adult resident of the State of  FILED  2014 Oct-23 PM 12:23U.S. DISTRICT COURTN.D. OF ALABAMA Case 5:14-cv-02029-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/23/14 Page 1 of 15  Alabama, and is the Associate Provost and NCAA Representative for UAH.5.John Beswick (hereinafter “Beswick”), is an adult resident of the State of Alabama, and at the time of the events giving rise to this litigation, was a Sargent with the UAHPolice Department.6.Regina Young Hyatt, PhD. (hereinafter “Hyatt”), is an adult resident of the Stateof Alabama, and at the time of the events giving rise to this litigation, was the Dean of Studentsat UAH, with responsibility for compliance with Title IX. III.JURISDICTION AND VENUE 7.This Court has jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331, as the claims present a question of federal law, and this Court possesses supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims of the plaintiff via 28 U.S.C. § 1367.Venue is proper in the Northern District of Alabama, Northeastern Division, as all acts complained of occurred withinthe geographical boundaries of Madison County, Alabama. IV.FACTUAL AVERMENTS 8.Plaintiff adopts and realleges each preceding paragraph as if fully set forth herein.9.In January 2013, Doe was a minor and a full time student at UAH.10.In the late evening of January 12, 2013, Doe was at student housing on the UAHcampus, in the dorm room of an acquaintance, at which point she consumed wine. Not wishing toleave campus after consuming alcohol, she phoned a friend and asked if she could spend thenight at her dorm room.11.After receiving permission to do so, Doe gathered her belongings and walked to building 706 in South East Campus Housing, where she fell asleep in a dorm room.12.Some time thereafter she was awakened by her friend’s flat mate, who inquired if  Case 5:14-cv-02029-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/23/14 Page 2 of 15  she was alright and provided her with a blanket before leaving, at which point Doe fell asleepagain.13.Thereafter Doe was awakened by a man she did not know, who informed her thatshe could not stay in that room, and had to leave. The man, later identified as Lasse Uusivirta,repeatedly told Doe that she couldn’t stay there and that it was unsafe. Disoriented, Doe left withhim.14.Uusivirta led plaintiff to another location and to a back bedroom, where heindicated she should lie down. Uusivirta subsequently got into the bed with the plaintiff and proceeded to kiss and grope her, prior to raping her. Plaintiff did not consent to any sexualcontact, nor was she capable of giving such consent. 15.Plaintiff, confused, in shock, and under the influence of alcohol, asked Uusivirtaseveral times who he was, at which point her assailant stopped, assisted her to dress and returnedher to the room in which he found her. 16.After he left Doe called several people to collect her finally left and drove to her apartment off campus. 17.After a while Doe was taken to the UAH police department, where she wasinterviewed by Beswick. During this interview she was shown a composite photograph of theUAH hockey team and identified her assailant. 18.During Beswick’s “interview” of the plaintiff, he informed her that “people whohang out at the hockey dorms share girls all the time”, and that it “was completely normal andokay to have sex with someone that [the plaintiff didn’t] know.”19.Beswick informed Doe that he knew that “[she] believed” she had been wronged,and therefore would not call her allegations “unfounded,” but made it clear to Doe that he did not Case 5:14-cv-02029-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/23/14 Page 3 of 15   believe her.20.Doe told him that if he did not intend to do anything about the rape, that shewould prefer Uusivirta not know she had spoken to him, as she feared retribution. She was thentaken to Crisis Services of North Alabama, where a rape examination was performed and a kitcollected. 21.Meanwhile, officers of the UAH campus police contacted Uusivirta, whoconfessed that he had engaged in sexual intercourse with the plaintiff but that she “seemed to bedrunk and didn’t know what was going on.” He further admitted that he realized she wasincapable of giving consent to sexual intercourse.22.Beswick contacted Doe after Uusivirta’s confession and informed her of same, butinformed her that she had “no case at all” in a court of law. Informing the plaintiff that “You willnever win in court,” he advised her to pursue the matter through the UAH conduct board, asopposed to through the criminal courts. Doe agreed to pursue the matter through the UAHdisciplinary system.23.The UAH investigation was closed on January 14, 2013, with Uusivirta beingidentified as the perpetrator, and the matter was forwarded to the UAH Student Conduct Boardfor prosecution.24.After conducting its investigation, the Board determined that Uusivirta’s athleticscholarship should be revoked and that he should be immediately expelled from UAH. Doe was pleased with this decision, as it meant that she would not have to face her attacker again.Shewas under the impression that Uusivirta would vacate campus within a day or two of the hearing,and no one advised her that he remained on the UAH campus. 25.Uusivirta, however, appealed this decision, which called upon Wren, the Case 5:14-cv-02029-HGD Document 1 Filed 10/23/14 Page 4 of 15
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks