A federal judge has denied a motion for a preliminary injunction that would have reinstated the women’s tennis program at the University of Albany (UAlbany). In so ruling, the court wrote that the 18 months that had elapsed from the time the program was shuttered to the filing of the motion demonstrated that the plaintiffs had not suffered the requisite irreparable harm.
The impetus for the lawsuit was the university’s decision in March 2016 to shut down the program.
Several players turned to the courts to seek the immediate restoration of the women’s tennis program; compliance with Title IX; the restoration of Gordon Graham as head coach; and attorney fees and monetary damages for Graham and the four former tennis players. The suit also asked the court to appoint a special master to oversee the school’s compliance with Title IX and any orders the court might issue.
Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that UAlbany violated a 1994 order by the state Supreme Court in Albany County, which required that any changes to the athletic program at UAlbany be in compliance with federal law, and that affected students would be given adequate opportunity to transfer. The origin of the 1994 order was UAlbany’s elimination of its wrestling, men’s tennis, and men’s and women’s swimming programs.
In addition, Graham has sued for age discrimination, alleging in the complaint that the athletic director said the 65-year-old coach was “old enough to retire.”
The lawsuit came on the heels of the issuance of a 12-page report in August by the State Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, which found that the UAlbany athletic department had not provided equal participation opportunities to male and female athletes over the past three academic years.
While the OCR gave the defendants three years to fix the problems, the suit seeks to shorten the period to comply to one year.
“More than 18 months passed between the time the defendants announced cancellation of the tennis program at SUNY Albany and the time that the defendants filed their cause of action in this court,” wrote the court. “The plaintiffs let an entire tennis season pass between the March 23, 2016 termination of the program and filing their suit. Players, including at least one who is a party to this suit, have graduated or left campus.”
Further, the court noted that a restoration of the tennis team would cause the university significant hardship, as the funds for women’s tennis had been reallocated to other programs within the UAlbany athletics department.
“Today, the district court denied our motion for a preliminary injunction to reinstate the women’s tennis team during the remainder of the trial,” said Bernays T. Barclay, the attorney for the former women’s tennis players and Gordon Graham, said in a statement. “While we are naturally disappointed, we remain committed to our clients and their cause. It is still early in this process and we are confident that the court will soon see that our clients are victims of SUNY Albany’s ongoing practice of discrimination.”
The suit is Pejovic et al v. State U. of N.Y. at Albany et al.
