Doe v. St. Francis School District

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that a university sued in a private suit under Title IX cannot be held liable on the ground of respondeat superior for an employee's violation of the statute
• stating, in the Title IX context, that a school district cannot be liable for an employee’s violation under a theory of respondeat superior
• noting “there is less to the conflict in standards than meets the eye, because in practice there is little difference between known and obvious, the former being a natural in‐ ference from the latter.”
• noting “there is less to the conflict in standards than meets the eye, because in practice there is little difference between known and obvious, the former being a natural in‐ ference from the latter.”
• school officials who heard only suspicions of sexual misconduct, and then only learned about teacher’s sexual abuse of victim after-the-fact, did not have “actual knowledge” under Title IX
• school officials who heard only suspicions of sexual misconduct, and then only learned about teacher’s sexual abuse of victim after-the- fact, did not have “actual knowledge” under Title IX

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).