Filed: Mar. 21, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 21, 2018
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS TANYA WALTON PRATT , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on a Partial Motion to Dismiss filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) by the individual Defendants James Danko, Levester Johnson, Stacie Colson Patterson, Anne Flaherty, Sally Click, Erin McCluney, Robert Padgett, and Martha Dwizlik (collectively "Individual Defendants") (Filing No. 64). On August 9, 2016, Plaintiff "John Doe" filed his Amended Comp
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS TANYA WALTON PRATT , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on a Partial Motion to Dismiss filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) by the individual Defendants James Danko, Levester Johnson, Stacie Colson Patterson, Anne Flaherty, Sally Click, Erin McCluney, Robert Padgett, and Martha Dwizlik (collectively "Individual Defendants") (Filing No. 64). On August 9, 2016, Plaintiff "John Doe" filed his Amended Compl..
More
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS
TANYA WALTON PRATT, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on a Partial Motion to Dismiss filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) by the individual Defendants James Danko, Levester Johnson, Stacie Colson Patterson, Anne Flaherty, Sally Click, Erin McCluney, Robert Padgett, and Martha Dwizlik (collectively "Individual Defendants") (Filing No. 64). On August 9, 2016, Plaintiff "John Doe" filed his Amended Complaint, asserting various claims against the Individual Defendants, "Jane Smith," and Butler University (Filing No. 13). Among the claims asserted against the Individual Defendants is a claim for violation of 20 U.S.C. § 1681 ("Title IX"), which provides that "[n]o person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. . . ." (Filing No. 13 at 22-23.)
The Individual Defendants filed their Partial Motion to Dismiss, asking the Court to dismiss the Plaintiff's Title IX claim against them on the basis that Title IX does not permit lawsuits against school officials, teachers, employees, or other individuals. They explain that the Supreme Court analyzed the substantive rights provided by Title IX and held that, although Title IX applies to institutions and programs that receive federal funds, the statute "has consistently been interpreted as not authorizing suit against school officials, teachers, and other individuals." Fitzgerald v. Barnstable Sch. Comm., 555 U.S. 246, 257 (2009). Each of the Individual Defendants is a current or former school official/employee of Butler University. Because a Title IX claim can be brought against the University only, and not its officials or employees, the Individual Defendants argue that the Plaintiff's Title IX claim against them must be dismissed.
The Plaintiff responds,
Based upon the case law cited in the individual BUTLER Defendants' Memorandum of Law [Dkt. 65], as well as research conducted independently by undersigned counsel, it appears that their motion is well-founded, and therefore, Plaintiff does not file any response in opposition to their motion.
. . . [B]ased on the argument and authorities cited above, Plaintiff JOHN DOE respectfully informs this Honorable Court that he has NO objection to the granting of Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss. [Dkt. 64].
(Filing No. 70 at 2-3.)
Upon review of the authority cited by the Individual Defendants, and based upon their argument and the Plaintiff's agreement with the Individual Defendants' position, the Court determines that dismissal of the Title IX claim against the Individual Defendants is appropriate. There are no set of facts that would allow the Plaintiff to pursue this claim against the Individual Defendants, and thus, the Court concludes that, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), the Partial Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted (Filing No. 64) must be and hereby is GRANTED. Count IV of the Amended Complaint is dismissed with prejudice as to Defendants James Danko, Levester Johnson, Stacie Colson Patterson, Anne Flaherty, Sally Click, Erin McCluney, Robert Padgett, and Martha Dwizlik.
SO ORDERED.
