{"id":1031,"date":"2018-02-12T14:37:31","date_gmt":"2018-02-12T14:37:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.bowditch.com\/campuscounselnewengland\/?p=1031"},"modified":"2020-07-31T13:27:54","modified_gmt":"2020-07-31T13:27:54","slug":"title-ix-claims-used-support-erroneous-outcome","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.bowditch.com\/campuscounselnewengland\/2018\/02\/12\/title-ix-claims-used-support-erroneous-outcome\/","title":{"rendered":"School\u2019s Historical Treatment of Other Title IX Claims Used to Support an \u201cErroneous Outcome\u201d Claim"},"content":{"rendered":"

On February 9, 2018, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision in Doe v. Miami University, et al<\/em><\/a>. While the Court upheld the dismissal of many of the claims John Doe asserted after having been found responsible for violating the university\u2019s sexual assault policy, including for hostile environment, deliberate indifference and \u00a7 1983<\/a>, it did allow his claim for erroneous outcome to go forward.<\/p>\n

The Court found that John Doe sufficiently alleged facts to cast doubt on the accuracy of his hearing. The sole witness against him provided a statement with conflicting accounts of whether the sexual activity was non-consensual, and one hearing-panel member provided an erroneous description of the university\u2019s sexual assault policy.<\/p>\n

Perhaps more importantly, the Court found that John Doe sufficiently alleged facts to show a causal connection between the erroneous outcome and gender bias (as needed to support his Title IX claim) largely through statistical evidence. In particular, John Doe amassed the following allegations in his complaint:<\/p>\n