Doe v. Baylor Univ.

• Decision Date: 07 March 2017
• Docket Number: 6:16–CV–173–RP
• Citation: 240 F.Supp.3d 646
• Parties: Jane DOE 1, Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, Jane Doe 7, Jane Doe 8, Jane Doe 9, and Jane Doe 10, Plaintiffs, v. BAYLOR UNIVERSITY, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas

240 F.Supp.3d 646

Jane DOE 1, Jane Doe 2, Jane Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, Jane Doe 7, Jane Doe 8, Jane Doe 9, and Jane Doe 10, Plaintiffs,

v.BAYLOR UNIVERSITY, Defendant.

6:16–CV–173–RP

United States District Court, W.D. Texas, Waco Division.

Signed March 7, 2017

Chad W. Dunn, K. Scott Brazil, Brazil & Dunn, Houston, TX, James R. Dunnam, Dunnam, Dunnam, et al., Waco, TX, for Plaintiffs.

Holly Gene McIntush, Thompson & Horton, LLP, Julie A. Springer, Sara E. Janes, Weisbart Springer Hayes, LLP, Austin, TX, Lisa Ann Brown, Thompson & Horton LLP, Houston, TX, for Defendant.

ORDER

ROBERT PITMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Each of the ten plaintiffs in this case allege that while they were students at Baylor University they were sexually assaulted by another student, but that when they sought assistance and protection from Baylor, the school did nothing (or almost nothing) in response to their reports. Plaintiffs allege Baylor discouraged them from reporting their assaults, failed to adequately investigate each of the assaults, and failed to ensure Plaintiffs would not be subjected to continuing assault and harassment. Plaintiffs assert that Baylor's practices in handling their reports reflect the school's widespread practice of mishandling reports of peer sexual assault. They allege these practices chilled other students from reporting sexual harassment, permitted the creation of a campus condition "rife with sexual assault," "substantially increased Plaintiffs' chances of being sexually assaulted," (Third Am. Compl., Dkt. 56, at 1–2, ¶ 29), and ultimately created a harassing educational environment that deprived Plaintiffs of a normal college education and other educational opportunities.

Plaintiffs seek to hold Baylor liable under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 ("Title IX"). Title IX 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." 20 U.S.C. § 1681(a).

At this stage of litigation, the Court considers only whether Plaintiffs' Complaint contains sufficient factual matter, if accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. Baylor attempts to disclaim liability by dismissing Plaintiffs' allegations as "an amalgam of incidents that involved completely different contexts, offenders, and victims," (Def.'s Mot. Dismiss Doe 7, Dkt. 62, at 21), and arguing that "evidence of a general problem of sexual violence is not sufficient," (id. at 22). This Court disagrees. Plaintiffs have not alleged that Baylor had knowledge of accusations against their specific assailants prior to their initial assaults, but what they have alleged—a widespread pattern of discriminatory responses to female students' reports of sexual assault—is arguably more egregious. Indeed, even those Supreme Court justices who expressed skepticism regarding holding institutions liable for sexual assaults on individual students under Title IX have suggested that "a clear pattern of discriminatory enforcement of school rules could raise an inference that the school itself is discriminating." Davis v. Monroe Cty. Bd. Educ. , 526 U.S. 629, 683, 119 S.Ct. 1661, 143 L.Ed.2d 839 (1999) (Kennedy, J., dissenting). In particular they noted that a "school's failure to enforce its rules when the boys target the girls on a widespread level, day after day, may support an inference that the school's decision not to respond is itself based on gender" and thereby be actionable under Title IX. Id.

I. STANDARD OF REVIEW

Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), a court may dismiss a complaint for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). "To survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, a complaint ‘does not need detailed factual allegations,’ but must provide the [plaintiffs'] grounds for entitlement to relief—including factual allegations that when assumed to be true ‘raise a right to relief above the speculative level.’ " Cuvillier v. Taylor , 503 F.3d 397, 401 (5th Cir. 2007) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) ). That is, "a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’ " Ashcroft v. Iqbal , 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (quoting Twombly , 550 U.S. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955 ). "[A] motion to dismiss under 12(b)(6) ‘is viewed with disfavor and is rarely granted.’ " Turner v. Pleasant , 663 F.3d 770, 775 (5th Cir. 2011) (quoting Harrington v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. , 563 F.3d 141, 147 (5th Cir. 2009) ).

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs are ten women who were students at Baylor at the time of the events at issue in this lawsuit. (Third Am. Compl., Dkt. 56, ¶¶ 1–10). Nine lived in housing owned or operated by the university. Each Plaintiff alleges a sexual assault that took place between 2004 and 2016. Each Plaintiff also alleges that she reported her assault to—and was met with an indifferent and inadequate response from—the Baylor counseling center, the Baylor police department, university medical personnel, or another student services office. Taken together, Plaintiffs allege, these facts demonstrate Baylor created a condition that substantially increased Plaintiffs' chances of being sexually assaulted, (id. at 1); chilled student reporting of sexual harassment, (id. ¶ 41); led to a sexually hostile environment at the university, (id. ¶ 43); caused Plaintiffs psychological damage and distress, (id. ¶ 48); and deprived Plaintiffs of a normal college education, (id. ¶ 50).

Specifically, each Plaintiff in this matter makes the following individual allegations:

Jane Doe 1 ("Doe 1"), who enrolled at Baylor in January 2014, alleges she was sexually assaulted by a player on the university's football team on April 26, 2014, at University Parks, an on-campus residence hall. (Id. ¶¶ 52–56). She alleges that upon reporting the assault to a university physician approximately two days later, the physician misinformed her and concealed information about additional reporting options, accommodations available under Title IX, and the availability of investigatory actions that could be undertaken by the university. (Id. ¶¶ 57–58). Doe 1 again reported the assault during the final exam period, but no official action was taken by the university. (Id. ¶ 59). As a result, she alleges, she was subject to repeated on-campus encounters with her assailant. (Id. ¶¶ 63–64). She developed severe anxiety and depression, leading to a decline in her academic performance and the withdrawal of her scholarship funds. (Id. ¶¶ 62, 65–67).

Jane Doe 2 ("Doe 2"), who enrolled at Baylor in August 2004, alleges she was assaulted at a house near campus on September 4, 2004. (Id. ¶¶ 72, 75–76). She first reported the sexual assault a few days later to the chaplain at her on-campus residence, Collins Hall; the dorm hall director was also informed. (Id. ¶¶ 77–78). The Baylor Police Department responded, but Doe 2 alleges that the officer with whom she interacted misinformed her about the consequences of filing a report and discouraged her from naming her assailant. (Id. ¶¶ 79–80). Doe 2 subsequently reported the incident to personnel at the Baylor Health Center, who conducted a physical exam but did not prepare a rape kit. (Id. ¶ 83). She subsequently and repeatedly encountered her assailant on-campus, (id. ¶¶ 85–86), and one such incident led her to inform an assistant dean, (id. ¶ 86). The university provided free counseling sessions for a time, but did not provide assistance once Doe 2 exhausted the number of sessions generally allocated to students. (Id. ¶ 88). Because of Baylor's actions, Doe 2 alleges, she experienced intense fear, nightmares, and a decline in academic performance that led to her suspension and the loss of her scholarship funds and financial aid. (Id. ¶¶ 85, 89–90).

Jane Doe 3 ("Doe 3"), who enrolled at Baylor in the fall of 2012, alleges she was sexually harassed and assaulted by a fellow residence hall staff member starting in the fall of 2013 and continuing through December 2015. (Id. ¶¶ 104, 107). She reported the assaults to the university counseling and health centers and ultimately informed the Baylor Police Department. (Id. ¶¶ 114, 118). Her university physician misinformed her about her reporting options, Title IX accommodations, and investigatory actions that could be undertaken by the university, and the university did not provide assistance once she exhausted the number of counseling sessions generally available to students. (Id. ¶¶ 113, 119). As a result, her academic performance suffered and her physical and mental health were severely impaired. (Id. ¶¶ 115, 120).

Jane Doe 4, who enrolled at Baylor in the fall of 2011, alleges she was sexually assaulted by another student on April 7, 2014. (Id. ¶¶ 121, 124–25). She first reported the assault to Baylor in June 2014, when she informed staff at the university's counseling center. (Id. ¶¶ 128–29). Despite providing Baylor with her assailant's name, repeatedly interacting with the counseling center, and reporting the incident to Baylor Judicial Affairs, Doe 4 was not informed of any potential accommodations available under Title IX, and no action was taken against her assailant. (Id. ¶¶ 130–32). This was true even after Doe 4 informed a Baylor counselor that she encountered her assailant on campus, causing her emotional and physical distress. (Id. ¶ 135–37). As a result of her assault and the university's response, Doe 4's physical and mental health were severely impaired, (id. ¶¶ 126, 135–36, 143), and her academic performance suffered, (id. ¶¶ 138–142).

Jane Doe 5 ("Doe 5") enrolled at Baylor in the fall of 2005; she alleges she was sexually assaulted by a fellow student in an on-campus...