Court Finds Much to Like in Consent Decree Ending Long-Running Title IX Case
A federal judge has approved and adopted a proposed consent decree entered into by a group of former athletes and West Virginia University Institute of Technology, which was accused by the plaintiffs of violating Title IX.
The plaintiffs, female softball players at WVUIT, sued the Board of Governors of West Virginia University in February 2008, alleging that the school did not provide the women’s softball team with equipment and facilities equal to those of the men’s baseball team.
The plaintiffs initially filed a complaint against WVU’s Board of Governors with the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights. The Office provided the parties with dispute resolution services, and the parties entered into an Early Complaint Resolution Agreement in August 2007.
The plaintiffs contend, however, that the defendants breached the ECR Agreement by failing to implement the changes that they had promised.
Subsequently, the plaintiffs filed the instant action with this court, seeking resolution of their ongoing dispute. In June 2008, the parties mediated the case and produced a Memorandum of Understanding. This Memorandum, however, failed to contain a provision requiring WVUIT to construct a new softball field. Since the plaintiffs wanted a new softball field to be constructed, they refused to sign the Memorandum, and as a result, settlement of the dispute failed.
In the following months, the parties informed this court that they were exploring further settlement options and essentially asked that activity in the case be suspended until the parties had sufficient time to develop their discussions. On July 1, 2010, the parties submitted a Joint Status Report in which they laid out a number of short and long-term solutions that both parties would be amenable to. At the conclusion of their report, the parties indicated that they would be amenable to a consent decree consistent with the solutions the parties offered in their joint status report.
On February 15, 2011, the court reviewed a document that the parties presented as a mutually-acceptable settlement, which could be molded into a consent decree.
The court noted that “a consent decree is … a continuing order, one having prospective effect.” Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375, 381-82, 128 L. Ed. 2d 391, 114 S. Ct. 1673 (1994).
“(T)his dispute has been ongoing for almost four years, and has been vigorously litigated by both sides,” wrote the court. “As a consequence, the court finds that the proposed consent decree submitted by the parties is a result of lengthy, arms-length deliberation and careful consideration by both parties.
“By way of summary, the proposed consent decree provides for both a short- and long-term solution to the disparity between the men’s and women’s athletic facilities.
“With respect to the short term solution, the defendants have reached an agreement with the Kanawha County Board of Education to allow the women’s softball team to use the Riverside High School Softball Facilities. The parties are working to enter into a ‘Property Use Agreement’ which outlines the specific uses of the athletic fields and related properties. The ‘Property Use Agreement’ will provide that all games and practices will occur at the Riverside High School Facility. These facilities are located 12 miles from the West Virginia campus. Furthermore, the defendants have hired a full-time head softball coach, Karen Gadberry, for their women’s softball program.
“The parties’ proposed long-term solution provides for the renovation of Martin Field, which is the current, on-campus sports facility, to accommodate football, soccer and softball. Once implemented, this plan would establish a permanent home for the women’s softball team, with appropriate facilities. The defendants have already commissioned a feasibility study for the renovations, and have submitted the study’s findings to the court. Having reviewed the study’s findings, the court finds that the proposed renovations would afford the women’s softball team suitable facilities.
“In view of the foregoing, the court finds the proposed consent decree to be fair, adequate and reasonable. Further, the court is persuaded that it is not ‘illegal, a product of collusion, or against the public interest.’ Instead, the court is satisfied that the proposed consent decree sets forth a framework that will help to resolve the parties’ dispute, and also contribute to the public interest.”
Terri Harrison and Alexis Cox v. Board Of Governors of West Virginia University Institute of Technology et al.; S.D.W.V.; CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:08-cv-00078, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84192; 7/29/11
Attorneys of Record: (for plaintiffs) James B. Lees, Jr., LEAD ATTORNEY, HUNT & LEES, Charleston, WV. (for defendants) J. A. Curia, III, Joanna I. Tabit, LEAD ATTORNEYS, STEPTOE & JOHNSON, Charleston, WV.
