A federal judge from the Southern District of California has ruled in favor of a group of female athletes in a Title IX class action lawsuit against the Sweetwater Union (Cal.) High School District.
Specifically, the court agreed with the female plaintiffs that the school district gave preferential treatment to boys’ athletic programs at Castle Park High School (CPHS) by providing them with better athletic facilities, resources, and opportunities.
The dispute began to surface in 2007 when the parents and the female plaintiffs alleged that CPHS and the school district by extension were violating Title IX. Among the areas of inequity were: “practice and competitive facilities; locker rooms; training facilities; equipment and supplies; travel and transportation, coaches and coaching facilities; scheduling of games and practice times; publicity; and funding,” according to the plaintiffs.
Additionally, the plaintiffs alleged that defendant “failed to provide female students with equal athletic participation opportunities, despite their demonstrated athletic interest and abilities to participate in athletics.”
The court seemed to give strong credence to one of the plaintiffs’ experts, Donna Lopiano, an attorney and former head of the Women’s Sports Foundation.
“On May 9, 2008, Lopiano conducted an on-site inspection at CPHS,” wrote the court. “In conducting a comprehensive Title IX evaluation of CPHS’s athletic program and facilities, Lopiano also reviewed documents produced by defendants and deposition testimony. Lopiano’s evaluation used the Title IX analysis set forth in the Policy Interpretation and Investigator’s Manual.
“At trial, Lopiano testified that she found wide-spread Title IX equal treatment and benefits violations at CPHS. Equal treatment and benefits claims allege sex-based differences in the schedules, equipment, coaching, and other factors affecting participants in athletics. The court notes that while Lopiano’s testimony was challenged, her methodology and conclusions were uncontroverted.”
Thus, the court concluded that “the balance of hardships weighs firmly in plaintiffs’ favor. The inequalities demonstrated at trial should have been rectified years ago by the district…plaintiffs are entitled to injunctive relief. Defendants are required to comply with Title IX in all aspects of its athletic programs and activities….”
Vicky Barker, Legal Director of the California Women’s Law Center, said the school district “had numerous opportunities to solve this problem. But instead of addressing the stark discrepancy between the girls and boys athletic programs, they chose to go to court and continue these clearly discriminatory practices.
Ollier v. Sweetwater Union High School, et al., S.D. Cal.; Civil No. 07cv714-L(WMC), 2/9/12.
Attorneys of record: (for the plaintiffs) Lawrence Martinez of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP.
