From a decision last week by Judge Mary McElroy (D.R.I.) in Stiles v. Brown Univ.:
The plaintiff is a senior at Brown and a member of the varsity lacrosse team. As a result of an alleged incident on October 30, 2021, a fellow student, Jane Roe, accused the plaintiff of sexual assault and filed a Title IX complaint with Brown on November 18, 2021. A Brown Threat Assessment Team met the next day to "determine whether there is reasonable cause to believe that the Prohibited Conduct is likely to continue and/or the [plaintiff] poses a significant threat of harm to the health, safety, and welfare of others and the University community." The Threat Assessment Team completed a rubric of questions concerning the allegations, any potential threat to the community, and any pattern of similar transgressions. Most of the questions were answered in the negative, but "due to the egregious nature of the alleged behavior" the Threat Assessment Team recommended an interim suspension pending determination of the Title IX complaint.
On November 30, 2021, John appealed his interim suspension to Vice President Eric Estes and submitted his response to the Title IX complaint. On December 6, 2021, Mr. Estes partially granted John's appeal by allowing him to complete the current semester remotely and remanded the question of John's suspension for the Spring semester to Brown's threat assessment team for renewed consideration based on John's response to the Title IX complaint. On December 10, 2021, the Threat Assessment Team affirmed its conclusion that the plaintiff's "Prohibited Conduct was likely to continue" as well as Mr. Estes' decision that the plaintiff should be suspended beginning on January 7, 2022, pending an investigation and resolution of the Title IX complaint….
The "student and private university relationship is essentially contractual in nature." "The relevant terms of contractual relationship between a student and a university typically include the language found in the university's student handbook." Courts often interpret the terms of a student handbook "in accordance with the parties' reasonable expectations, giving those terms the meaning that the university reasonably should expect the student to take from them." …
The operative contract is Brown's Student Conduct Procedures and Sexual Misconduct Procedure. Relevant here, the Student Conduct Procedures entitle the plaintiff to "not be presumed responsible of any alleged violations unless so found through the appropriate student conduct hearing" and to be "afforded an opportunity to offer a relevant response." The Sexual Misconduct Procedure also "presumes that the Respondent is not responsible for the alleged Prohibited conduct" and further guarantees John "meaningful opportunities to participate" in the Title IX process. This reasonably includes any important phase of the process that will affect John's rights, such as his continuing education, access to campus, or participation in school sponsored activities.
