Doe v. Brown University
270 F. Supp. 3d 556
D.R.I.2017Background
- Jane Doe, a Providence College student, alleges she was drugged and sexually assaulted in a Brown University dorm by three Brown students in 2013–2014 and later tested positive for incapacitating drugs.
- Doe reported the assault to Providence police and Brown University; police seized evidence from Brown students’ phones showing references to rape and explicit photos.
- Brown agreed to but never completed a student-discipline inquiry and ultimately abandoned disciplinary action; Doe alleges Brown officials were deliberately indifferent.
- Doe withdrew from Providence College, claiming fear for her safety because the alleged assailants (Brown students) remained free on campus, which she says created a hostile educational environment that forced her to leave.
- She sued Brown and two Brown administrators under Title IX for deliberate indifference and sought damages; she also asserted state-law claims under RICRA and the Rhode Island Constitution.
- Defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings; the court accepted Doe’s pleaded facts as true for the motion and considered whether Title IX covers non-students harmed by students of a funding recipient.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a non-student may bring a Title IX damages claim against a university for sexual assault committed by the university’s students | Doe: Title IX’s language protects any “person” and therefore covers non-students (e.g., campus guests) injured by a school’s deliberate indifference | Brown: Title IX protects students (and employees) of the funding recipient; Doe, a non-Brown student, is not in the protected class and cannot sue Brown for damages under Title IX | Court: Title IX private cause of action is limited to persons within the school’s program (students or employees); Doe, not a Brown student, fails to state a Title IX claim |
| Whether Brown’s alleged failure to discipline created a deprivation of educational opportunities at Providence College sufficient for Title IX | Doe: Brown’s deliberate indifference caused a hostile educational environment at Providence College that deprived her of educational benefits | Brown: Brown had no control over Providence College programs or authority to remedy Doe’s alleged deprivation there | Court: No systemic effect on Brown’s educational programs; Brown lacked authority to redress harm to Doe’s education at Providence College; element not met |
| Applicability of precedents recognizing private remedies under Title IX to non-students | Doe: Cases and Title IX text support broad coverage of “persons” | Brown: Supreme Court and circuit authority interpret private right to reach students or employees tied to the recipient’s programs | Court: Cited Supreme Court precedent construes Title IX private action as program-specific and tied to persons within the recipient’s educational programs; non-student claims not covered |
| Whether to retain supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims after dismissal of federal claim | Doe: (implicit) litigate state claims in federal court | Brown: (implicit) move to dismiss federal claims, prompting jurisdictional reassessment | Court: Declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction; state claims dismissed without prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, 526 U.S. 629 (1999) (private Title IX damages require school’s deliberate indifference that causes students to be deprived of educational opportunities)
- Cannon v. University of Chicago, 441 U.S. 677 (1979) (recognized implied private right of action under Title IX)
- Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District, 524 U.S. 274 (1998) (recipient liable only if it had authority to take corrective action and was deliberately indifferent)
- North Haven Board of Education v. Bell, 456 U.S. 512 (1982) (Title IX employment provisions cover school employees; decision does not extend private damages remedy to non-students of the recipient)
- Fitzgerald v. Barnstable School Committee, 555 U.S. 246 (2009) (Title IX provides exclusive federal remedy for gender discrimination in federally funded education programs)