Davis v. Rumsey Hall School, Inc.
3:20-cv-01822
D. Conn.Sep 29, 2023Background
- Plaintiff Tim Davis alleges repeated sexual abuse by Rumsey Hall dean of students Robert McGrew while a boarding student (dorm incidents during 1989–1991; later study-hall and office incidents in 1992).
- McGrew was hired c.1988 and served as dean, teacher, coach, and dorm parent with an apartment in the dormitory; Plaintiff did not report the dorm incidents while they were occurring.
- Plaintiff reported the 1992 study-hall incident to his advisor, who notified headmaster Thomas Farmen; the school’s investigation and its findings are disputed.
- School-insurer records indicate another student’s parent reported alleged misconduct by McGrew in fall 1991 (timing disputed); Farmen’s 1994 memorandum documents complaints in 1993–1994 describing McGrew as physically affectionate and counseled but retained.
- Defendant moved for partial summary judgment seeking to bar liability for incidents before fall 1991; Plaintiff asserted he may proceed under Doe v. Saint Francis Hospital (a non-notice theory) and that factual disputes exist as to notice.
- The district court denied the motion in full: it held Plaintiff adequately pleaded a Saint Francis theory and that genuine disputes of material fact exist both as to application of Saint Francis and as to notice before fall 1991.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Plaintiff may pursue a Saint Francis (non-notice) theory despite pleading notice-based facts | Complaint supplies fair notice; factual allegations support Saint Francis exceptions | Plaintiff limited to a notice theory and should be precluded from a surprise non-notice theory | Court: complaint adequately pleaded Saint Francis theory; plaintiff not precluded |
| Whether Saint Francis exceptions can establish liability absent actual/constructive notice | Defendant’s placement of McGrew (dorm parent with apartment), lack of protective policies, and school culture created/increased risk or made harm foreseeable given school’s duty | No evidence of propensity before fall 1991; hiring revealed no red flags; flirtatious/affectionate conduct insufficient | Court: genuine disputes of material fact exist on both Saint Francis exceptions; summary judgment denied as to pre-1991 dorm incidents |
| Whether the school had actual or constructive notice of McGrew’s propensity before fall 1991 | Insurer records and other evidence (Student A report, Farmen memo, culture, settlements) permit an inference of notice | Disputes timing and content of reports; Farmen avers no complaints while Davis was a student | Court: genuine dispute of material fact on notice pre-fall 1991; question for jury |
| Whether partial summary judgment should bar all liability for dorm incidents in 1989–1991 | Saint Francis or notice disputes make dorm incidents triable issues | Absent notice, school not liable for incidents before students’ reports | Court: denied in full; dorm incidents remain at issue for trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Doe v. Saint Francis Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 309 Conn. 146 (2013) (establishes two exceptions allowing liability for third‑party intentional misconduct absent notice)
- Doe v. Boy Scouts of Am. Corp., 323 Conn. 303 (2016) (applies and endorses Saint Francis framework)
- Doe v. Hartford Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp., 317 Conn. 357 (2015) (discusses duty and foreseeability in negligence claims)
- Doe v. Town of Madison, 340 Conn. 1 (2021) (contrast on when flirtatious conduct is insufficient to establish notice)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (standard for genuine dispute at summary judgment)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (movant’s burden in summary judgment by pointing to absence of evidence)
- Hall v. Bergman, 296 Conn. 169 (2010) (elements for negligent infliction of emotional distress)
- Appleton v. Bd. of Educ. of Town of Stonington, 254 Conn. 205 (2000) (elements for intentional infliction of emotional distress)