JANE DOE v. UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY, et al. - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Tanja Trezise on May 18, 2020

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Tad Thomas, THOMAS LAW OFFICES, PLLC, Louisville, Kentucky, for Appellant. Bryan H. Beauman, STURGILL, TURNER, BARKER & MOLONEY, PLLC, Lexington, Kentucky, for Appellees.

Attorneys 2: ON BRIEF: Tad Thomas, Lindsay Cordes, THOMAS LAW OFFICES, PLLC, Louisville, Kentucky, for Appellant. Bryan H. Beauman, Jessica R. Stigall, STURGILL, TURNER, BARKER & MOLONEY, PLLC, Lexington, Kentucky, William E. Thro, UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY, Lexington, Kentucky, for Appellees.

Judge(s): BATCHELDER, DONALD, and READLER, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky at Lexington

ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge. Jane Doe alleges that the University of Kentucky (UK) violated Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), 86 Stat. 373, codified at 20 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq., by responding with deliberate indifference to her accusations of student-on-student harassment. Because Jane Doe failed to show that UK’s response subjected her to further actionable harassment that caused Title IX injuries, we AFFIRM the district court’s grant of summary judgment.

Attachments: