16 F. Supp. 3d 89
D. Conn.2014Background
- Quinnipiac University a private university in Connecticut; Fairchild long-time head coach of women’s softball, terminated July 2013.
- Fairchild sues for Title IX anti-retaliation, CEPA, and Connecticut CEPA analog §31-51q violations.
- Biediger v. Quinnipiac Univ. Title IX case against Quinnipiac involved roster management and injunctions; Fairchild testified in that matter.
- I previously granted preliminary injunctions restraining certain actions against women’s teams in Biediger; consent decree followed in 2013.
- Fairchild testified under subpoena in Biediger proceedings; she was terminated three weeks after the consent decree was approved.
- Quinnipiac moves to dismiss; Fairchild moves to defer issues and strike; the court denies the motion to dismiss as to Title IX retaliation and §31-51q, and denies mootness of the other motions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Fairchild’s Title IX retaliation claim is viable after dismissal standards. | Fairchild pleads protected testimony linked to Title IX proceedings. | transcripts are not protected speech and not tied to public concern at issue. | Denied; Title IX retaliation claim survives. |
| Whether Fairchild’s §31-51q claim is viable. | Speech related to retaliation is protected; connection to public concern. | Speech not protected or sufficiently connected to public concern. | Denied; §31-51q retaliatory discharge claim survives. |
| Whether the CEPA claim is sufficiently pled to survive dismissal. | Allegations provide notice of potential wage disparities. | Allegations are vague/conclusory. | Denied; CEPA claim survives. |
| Whether the court should consider transcripts outside the complaint at this stage. | Transcripts are integral or incorporated by reference. | Transcripts require summary judgment procedure. | Court declines conversion; transcripts not considered for dismissal at this stage. |
| Procedural posture of motions to defer/strike related to dismissal. | Motions denied as moot. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Birmingham Bd. of Educ., 544 U.S. 167 (U.S. 2005) (retaliation under Title IX constitutes discrimination on basis of sex)
- Lopez v. Burris Logistics Co., 952 F. Supp. 2d 396 (D. Conn. 2013) (First Amendment protection with matter of public concern requires balancing)
- Daley v. Aetna Life & Cas. Co., 249 Conn. 766 (Conn. 1999) (speech on matter of public concern protected when not undermining employment)
- Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138 (U.S. 1983) (definition of matter of public concern)
- Biediger v. Quinnipiac Univ., 616 F. Supp. 2d 277 (D. Conn. 2009) (title IX injunctions; roster-management evidence)
- Biediger v. Quinnipiac Univ., 691 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2012) (affirmation of injunction and Title IX issues)