ERIC MENTAIL ANDERSON v. STATE OF FLORIDA

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that some aspects of Titles VII and IX are to be construed in pari materia
• recognizing that key evidence supporting a claim of deliberate indifference was what university knew and did in response to a prior complaint from a student other than plaintiff
• holding that “if [an institution] learns that its measures” to “end the harassment” of the plaintiff “have proved inadequate, it may be required to take further steps to avoid new liability”
• noting that it is an open question whether the denial of informal tutoring from a professor is an educational benefit that could form the basis of a Title IX suit
• noting that, if an institution “learns that its measures have proved inadequate” in preventing harassment, “it may be required to take further steps to avoid new liability” under Title IX
• explaining that the purpose of a reply brief is “to counter the [opponent’s] arguments, not to offer new theories of error for the first time”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).