Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

16-8298 - Doe v. University of Chicago et al

Download Files


Document in Context
16-8298 - Doe v. University of Chicago et al
March 2, 2017
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. This is the publicly available, redacted version of the Opinion of 09/22/2016 entered as R. 35.Emailed notice(slb, )
September 20, 2017
PDF | More
ion paper, by 10/02/2017, either confirming that interpretation or explaining how the allegations should otherwise be read. The status hearing of 10/05/2017 remains as scheduled.Emailed notice(Chang, Edmond)MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 9/20/2017: For the reasons stated in the Opinion, Defendant University of Chicago's motion 64 to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part. As currently interpreted (but must be confirmed in a position paper), the Title IX claims based on gender discrimination, selective enforcement, and retaliation (Counts 1-3) survive, as does the claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count 5). But the deliberate indifference theory of liability under Title IX (part of Count 1), and the claims for promissory estoppel (Count 4) and negligent infliction of emotional distress (Count 5), are dismissed. As explained in the Opinion, the survival of Counts 1, 2, 3, and 5 depends on the interpretation of Amended Complaint paragraphs 46-48 to allege that Jeremy Inabinet intentionally encouraged Jane Doe to file a false complaint against John Doe, knowing that the complaint was false. John Doe must file a posit