Fill out our Daily Orange reader survey to make our paper better


on campus

Expelled student sues SU over handling of Title IX investigation

Daily Orange File Photo

The student was expelled in September 2015, according to court documents.

A former Syracuse University student filed a lawsuit against the university last week over its handling of a 2015 Title IX investigation, claiming there was a “reckless” indifference to her rights, according to court documents.

The student, who appears as “Jane Doe” in the lawsuit, was expelled from SU in September 2015 after her ex-boyfriend submitted a Title IX complaint against her, per court documents. The United States Department of Education is currently investigating SU’s handling of the expelled student’s Title IX case following a complaint she submitted, according to court documents.

The suit appears to be connected to the federal Title IX investigation opened at SU in June 2016. The student involved in that investigation also claims they reported a sexual assault to SU in May 2015. Both the Title IX investigation and the lawsuit mention a plagiarism complaint filed by a student against other students that same year.

The expelled student, a South Korean citizen, in the lawsuit claims that her ex-boyfriend filed his complaint in retaliation after she reported her sexual assault to the Syracuse Police Department and SU’s Counseling Center, according to court documents. She wants SU to allow her to return to campus, clear her disciplinary records and pay damages for harming her career and reputation, per court documents.

She was a master’s student in the computer science program, originally scheduled to graduate in May 2016, per court documents. She is being represented by Joon Park, a lawyer at the New York City-based firm Park Legal Counsel Group.



Sarah Scalese, SU’s senior associate vice president for university communications, said in a statement on Wednesday that the university is committed to investigating and resolving Title IX complaints as fairly, quickly and sensitively as possible.

“That is what happened in this case,” Scalese said. “Per federal privacy law and University policy, we do not comment on the specifics of any individual cases.”  

Less than a week after the student reported the sexual assault to the Counseling Center in 2015, the student’s ex-boyfriend requested that SU’s Department of Public Safety issue him a no-contact order, per court documents

The student’s ex-boyfriend, who is identified as “Student X” in the lawsuit, filed a Title IX complaint against her three weeks after her initial conversation with the Counseling Center therapist, according to court documents.

The now-expelled student requested a no-contact order against her ex-boyfriend after he filed for one against her, according to court documents. SU denied her request despite her claims that he appeared in her apartment several times without her permission, per court documents.

The student suing SU was involved in a previous conduct investigation in which SU determined she had wrongfully accused another student of plagiarizing a product design in 2015, according to court documents. SU suspended the student suing SU in June 2015, per the lawsuit.

The University Conduct Board expelled her three months later for visiting her ex-boyfriend’s house the same day the no-contact order was issued against her, contacting third parties associated with her ex-boyfriend while the order was in place, damaging her ex-boyfriend’s vehicle and for filing her Title IX complaint in retaliation against her ex-boyfriend for the no-contact order, according to court documents.

The student claims she visited her ex-boyfriend’s house to retrieve her car. She denies that she damaged his car and also denies that her Title IX complaint was filed in retaliation, per court documents.

Her lawyer argues in the lawsuit that she couldn’t have retaliated against her ex-boyfriend because her conversation with the staff therapist and her complaint to SPD both occurred before his request for a no-contact order, according to court documents.

The conduct board denied both of her appeals, per court documents.

ch





Top Stories