The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court and found that a former student-athlete’s sexual harassment lawsuit against a highly decorated women’s soccer coach at the University of North Carolina deserves to go to trial.
Plaintiffs Melissa Jennings and Debbie Keller, both of whom were members of the soccer team, alleged in a lawsuit that highly decorated Head Soccer Coach Anson Dorrance frequently participated in discussions about the sex life of his players.
The plaintiffs were offended by Dorrance’s curiosity and persistence in discussing such personal issues with the team. In the fall of 1996, Jennings met with Susan Ehringhaus, then Assistant to the Chancellor and Senior University Counsel. She complained to Ehringhaus about a number of things relating to Dorrance including:
“(1) Dorrance failing to come visit Jennings in the hospital when she got sick during the fall of her freshman year;
“(2) Dorrance failing to tell the team that Jennings was in the hospital with an illness during the fall of her freshman year as an explanation for why Jennings missed a game;
“(3) Dorrance directing Jennings to buy Gatorade for the team and the team’s opponent due to a disruption of water supply in Chapel Hill arising from Hurricane Fran and then not reimbursing Jennings;
“(4) Dorrance encouraging Jennings to attend parties where teammates were present even though Jennings told him that she did not want to attend because she was underage and some women were drinking alcohol at the parties; and
“(5) Dorrance making sexual comments at practice, such as asking a team member who is ‘shacking up’ and asking another teammate who a team member’s ‘f*** of the week’ is.
Ehringhaus allegedly “encouraged Jennings to talk with Dorrance about all of these issues.”
At the end of the season, Jennings met with Dorrance. Initially, her grades were called into question – she had a GPA of 1.58. The conversation, she claims, quickly turned to “whether her social life was adversely affecting her grades.”
“As part of that inquiry, Jennings testified that Dorrance specifically asked Jennings, ‘Who are you f***ing?’ and whether it was adversely affecting her grades. Although Jennings testified that Dorrance used the word ‘f***’ a lot during practice, the question took her aback. Jennings immediately told Dorrance that her personal life was ‘none of his g** d*** business.’”
More than a year later, Jennings was cut from the team, purportedly for a failure to perform on the field and academic reasons. Dorrance wrote in a letter to then AD John Swofford that Jennings “cannot compete at this level and to make matters worse she does not fit in socially with the team. I have tried to talk to her on several occasions (including once in my home) and nothing is helping. She is not happy and frankly I don’t see it changing.”
Jennings and Keller sued, though Keller would eventually settle. A district judge granted summary judgment to the defendants, but the ruling was appealed.
The appeals court found, in a majority decision, that the jury should decide whether Dorrance’s conduct violated the law.
“In sum, a rational jury could find that Jennings, who had played competitive soccer since the age of six, including stints on boys teams, was deprived of the educational advantage of UNC’s soccer program, despite her attempts to improve and her disappointment when she was cut from the team, because of Dorrance’s harassment.
“This is a difficult case, but I ultimately believe that Jennings has presented enough evidence for her Title IX claims to move forward. Drawing inferences in Jennings’s favor, a jury could conclude that the pervasive, hostile environment, resulting from Dorrance’s conduct, amounted to sexual harassment and effectively deprived her of the educational benefits of being a student-athlete at the University.”
Melissa Jennings et al v. University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill et al.; 4th Cir.; No. 04-2447; 4/9/07
