27 F.4th 805
2d Cir.2022Background
- In 2015 Yale student Jane Doe accused fellow student Saifullah Khan of sexual assault; Yale opened a UWC disciplinary investigation and Connecticut authorities brought criminal charges.
- At a 2018 criminal trial a jury acquitted Khan; Yale later reconvened its University-Wide Committee (UWC) hearing and, applying a preponderance standard, expelled Khan.
- Khan sued Doe for defamation and tortious interference; the district court dismissed Doe based on (a) Connecticut’s statute of limitations for the 2015 statements and (b) absolute quasi-judicial immunity for Doe’s 2018 UWC statements.
- Yale’s Sexual Misconduct Policy and federal/state guidance (DOE ‘‘Dear Colleague’’ letter; Conn. Gen. Stat. §10a-55m) inform the university process, which lacks several judicial features (no oath, limited party presence, no cross-examination, restricted advisor role).
- On appeal the Second Circuit concluded Connecticut law was unsettled on whether absolute quasi-judicial immunity can extend to non-government proceedings (like Yale’s UWC), so it certified controlling questions to the Connecticut Supreme Court and reserved decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a proceeding before a non-government entity can ever be "quasi-judicial" under Connecticut law | Khan: Connecticut privilege should not shield non-government hearings; immunity is tied to governmental adjudicative functions | Doe: Quasi-judicial immunity can extend to private proceedings that function like adjudications; UWC is such a proceeding | Court: Could not predict CT law; certified the question to the Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Whether Yale’s 2018 UWC hearing qualifies as quasi-judicial | Khan: UWC lacks core judicial safeguards (no oath, limited presence, no cross-exam), so it is not quasi-judicial | Doe: UWC is functionally adjudicative and informed by Title IX/state law, warranting immunity | Court: Could not decide on record; certified detailed questions about requirements and procedures to CT Supreme Court |
| Whether Doe’s 2018 statements are protected by absolute quasi-judicial immunity (defamation/tortious interference) | Khan: Even if some privilege exists, it should not be absolute for private university proceedings | Doe: Absolute immunity applies and bars Khan’s claims based on her UWC statements | Court: Declined to resolve; asked CT Supreme Court whether absolute immunity, qualified immunity, or no immunity applies |
| Statute of limitations for 2015 allegations and timeliness of tortious interference claim | Khan: 2018 UWC repetition makes interference timely; 2015 claims alone would be time-barred | Doe: 2015 statements are time-barred; 2018 UWC statements (if immune) cannot save the tortious-interference claim | Court: District court previously held 2015 claims time-barred and relied on immunity for 2018 statements; Second Circuit left ultimate resolution pending CT Supreme Court guidance |
Key Cases Cited
- Petyan v. Ellis, 200 Conn. 243 (Conn. 1986) (recognized absolute privilege for statements in certain administrative/quasi-judicial proceedings)
- Blakeslee & Sons v. Carroll, 64 Conn. 223 (Conn. 1894) (narrow view of proceedings qualifying as judicial/quasi-judicial)
- Kelley v. Bonney, 221 Conn. 549 (Conn. 1992) (factors to determine quasi-judicial nature; emphasis on application of law to facts and procedural safeguards)
- Craig v. Stafford Const., Inc., 271 Conn. 78 (Conn. 2004) (applied Kelley factors and public-policy rationale to extend immunity to government internal proceedings)
- Rioux v. Barry, 283 Conn. 338 (Conn. 2007) (discussed limits of quasi-judicial immunity for certain torts)
- Cleavinger v. Saxner, 474 U.S. 193 (U.S. 1985) (federal prison disciplinary committee entitled only to qualified—not absolute—immunity where procedures lacked judicial characteristics)
- Briscoe v. LaHue, 460 U.S. 325 (U.S. 1983) (historical grounding of witness/judicial immunity to encourage candid testimony)
- DiBella v. Hopkins, 403 F.3d 102 (2d Cir. 2005) (standard for predicting state law and when to certify questions)
- Overall v. University of Pennsylvania, 412 F.3d 492 (3d Cir. 2005) (private university grievance proceeding not quasi-judicial where lacking statutory/role-based public features)
- Gross v. Rell, 304 Conn. 234 (Conn. 2012) (Connecticut Supreme Court decision involved scope of judicial immunity in a different factual context)