Dartmouth Sexual Misconduct Suit Questions School's Legal Process
A federal lawsuit filed against Dartmouth College raises questions about the roles played by Dartmouth's Title IX coordinator, the outside counsel hired to investigate the claims, and the school's office of general counsel.
November 16, 2018 at 04:56 PM
6 minute read
A federal lawsuit filed against Dartmouth College on Thursday alleging that the school did not adequately respond to women's complaints about sexual misconduct involving three former faculty members raises questions about the roles played by Dartmouth's Title IX coordinator and an outside counsel hired to investigate the claims. It also indirectly raises similar questions about the school's office of general counsel.
But Dartmouth was not answering any questions Friday.
A statement to Corporate Counsel on behalf of the school from Justin Anderson, vice president of communications, said, “Sexual misconduct and harassment have no place at Dartmouth. … However, we respectfully, but strongly, disagree with the characterizations of Dartmouth's actions in the complaint and will respond through our own court filings.”
The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court of the District of New Hampshire, seeks $70 million in damages. The complaint accuses Dartmouth of “breaching its duty to protect its students from unwanted sexual harassment and sexual assault and to provide an education and/or workplace free from sexual harassment and other forms of gender-based discrimination.”
Among other things, it alleges sexual assault, harassment and discrimination from three former professors in the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, including the department's chair. It labels the department a “predators' club.”
The suit accuses the school of ignoring their complaints about the issues for more than 16 years. It alleges that professors Todd Heatherton, William Kelley and Paul Whalen “leered at, groped, sexted, intoxicated and even raped female students”—although only one professor was accused of rape in the suit.
The complaint says the school “permitted three of its prominent (and well- funded) professors to turn a human behavior research department into a 21st Century 'Animal House.'”
The three men could not be reached for comment, but The New York Times quoted a statement from Heatherton saying he “categorically denies playing any role in creating a toxic environment at Dartmouth College.” The Times said he also apologized for behavior that women had construed as sexual, and he said it had been taken out of context.
The complaint says at least 27 women raised Title IX complaints to Dartmouth, where nonlawyer Kristi Clemens serves as the Title IX coordinator. Clemens on Friday also declined to comment on her role in the investigation.
The complaint alleges that the women students were told to continue working with the three professors for at least four months after their complaints were filed, and that “the sexual harassment continued unabated.” Some of the professors continued to be promoted even after the complaints were filed, it says.
Dartmouth only disclosed the Title IX investigation after news of it was leaked to the media in October 2017, the complaint states, and the New Hampshire Attorney General's Office opened a criminal investigation.
Dartmouth then hired an outside counsel to conduct an independent investigation. The investigator, Jennifer Davis, founder of Jenn Davis LLC in Wellesley, Massachusetts, was out of the country Friday and unavailable for comment.
But the women students complained about Davis in the complaint. Though the school promised students a voice in the investigation, the complaint says, “Dartmouth unilaterally stopped the investigation and allowed the three professors to retire and/or resign in July 2018, more than 15 months after plaintiffs filed their initial complaints.”
Dartmouth's statement put it this way: “As a result of the misconduct we found earlier this year by the three faculty members in the Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences (PBS), we took unprecedented steps toward revoking their tenure and terminating their employment. They are no longer at Dartmouth and remain banned from our campus and from attending all Dartmouth-sponsored events, no matter where the events are held.”
The complaint also accuses Davis of gathering “extensive confidential information” from the complainants, including health care reports, and then sharing it with the three professors and their lawyers without the students' knowledge or consent.
The suit does not explicitly mention Dartmouth general counsel Sandhya Iyer. But at other universities that underwent high-profile sexual abuse cases, such as Penn State and Michigan State, the general counsel have lost their jobs over their handling of the issues.
Iyer did not return messages Friday asking about any role she had in handling the complaints, advising the school administrators, or hiring or overseeing Davis, the independent investigator. The GC's website states that all outside counsel report through Iyer's office.
The complaint also accuses Dartmouth of “taking steps to silence the victims and discourage them from pursuing legal action or demanding change.” It cites an Oct. 12 departmental meeting called with graduate students and Clemens, the Title IX coordinator, to “dispel rumors” about the Title IX investigation.
“It became quickly apparent that the meeting was a public platform to disparage the victims and discourage them from pursuing legal action,” the complaint states. It says the victims were accused of “pulling the department backwards rather than forward” by continuing to demand change at Dartmouth.
In a statement, Karen Bitar, a partner at Seyfarth Shaw in New York who is not involved in the case, said, “What makes this complaint unique is the level of detail … as to the internal investigation that began in February 2017 and ended in July 2018. The complaint also details how the investigation was a sham, and that the professors were permitted to resign or retire before any disciplinary proceeding took place, and while Dartmouth was under investigation by the NH attorney general.”
Bitar's statement adds, “Dartmouth took significant steps to protect the faculty at issue, and took steps, set forth in detail, designed to dissuade the victims from coming forward. This will be a difficult lawsuit to defend.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFTC Sues PepsiCo for Alleged Price Break to Big-Box Retailer, Incurs Holyoak's Wrath
5 minute readWells Fargo and Bank of America Agree to Pay Combined $60 Million to Settle SEC Probe
‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
5 minute readMLB's Texas Rangers Search for a New GC and a Broadcasting Deal
Trending Stories
- 1Reviewing Judge Merchan's Unconditional Discharge
- 2With New Civil Jury Selection Rule, Litigants Should Carefully Weigh Waiver Risks
- 3Young Lawyers Become Old(er) Lawyers
- 4Caught In the In Between: A Legal Roadmap for the Sandwich Generation
- 5Top 10 Developments, Lessons, and Reminders of 2024
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250