Victory in the 10th Circuit! The Court reversed the District Court on Doe's Title IX claim, agreeing with Doe that "disturbing procedural irregularities" gave rise to the plausible claim that the University of Denver was gender-biased against John Doe.

Decision here. Some snapshots here.

Some examples:

U of Denver interviewed "11 of Jane Doe's witnesses but initially refusing to interview all five of John Doe's for reasons that they were "duplicative"...though "the same could be said for Jane's 11 witnesses."

And

Jane Doe " told an array of inconsistent stories about the alleged incident. She told some people the assault happened on Friday night and others that it happened on Saturday morning. She told some people that she woke up to John fondling her, others that she woke up to him engaging in intercourse, and others still that the two agreed to have sex, but when she told him of some pain, he convinced her to continue. And none of the witness accounts completely align with the story she told investigators. The Final Report does not mention any of these inconsistencies."

This decision is particularly noteworthy because it is a rare reversal of a summary judgment decision (appellate courts in Title IX cases usually reverse or affirm motions to dismiss, which happen earlier in the litigation process).

The case was handled by Nesenoff & Miltenberg, a firm that has pioneered many pathbreaking victories for accused students.

We've added this in our Title IX Legal Database.