Doe v. University of the South

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that student’s parents “have failed to plead facts or cite law which establish they have standing to pursue a contract implied in law or unjust enrichment claim against the University”
• explaining that, in considering a school's disciplinary outcomes, it is not for the courts to review who is credible
• stating that it is not for the courts to review “whether a sexual assault occurred, whether any such acts were consensual, or who, as between John Doe and the Complainant is credible”
• dismissing deliberate indifference claim because the complaint did not allege that the university’s actions constituted sexual harassment
• dismissing declaratory judgment claim regarding Clery Act violations when only state law contract and tort claims remained live in case
• finding plaintiff had failed to plead that a similarly situated woman would not have been subjected to the same disciplinary proceedings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).