Morin v. Fordham University

Background

Andrea Morin alleged that, during a September 10, 2020 Zoom class taught by Howard Robinson, she saw Robinson masturbating on video. She reported the incident to Fordham University and later filed a Title IX complaint. The university suspended Robinson, imposed a no-contact directive, investigated the incident, and informed Morin that Robinson had been terminated.

Morin also alleged that Mary Ann Forgey refused a requested extension for coursework, gave her an F in a course, and that university employees handled her grade appeal in a retaliatory manner. Morin alleged that the failing grade delayed her graduation and caused other academic and financial consequences.

The claims remaining when the court considered the motions were: Title IX sexual harassment, Title IX retaliation, and Title VII hostile educational environment against Fordham; a federal civil-rights claim against Robinson; a federal civil-rights retaliation claim against Forgey; and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims against Robinson and Forgey. Morin had voluntarily dismissed her Title IX and Title VII claims against Robinson and Forgey.

Legal standard

The defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which asks whether the complaint states enough plausible facts to support a legal claim. At this stage, the court accepted the complaint’s factual allegations as true and drew reasonable inferences in Morin’s favor.

Court’s analysis

Title VII claim

The court dismissed Morin’s Title VII hostile-environment claim against Fordham without prejudice because Title VII applies to employment relationships, and Morin did not allege that she had been a Fordham employee.

Federal civil-rights claims

The court dismissed without prejudice the federal civil-rights claims against Robinson and Forgey. Those claims required allegations that the defendants acted under authority provided by state law. The court took notice that Fordham is a private university and concluded that Morin had not alleged facts showing that Robinson or Forgey were state actors.

Emotional-distress claims

The court retained jurisdiction over Morin’s state-law intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claims because they arose from the same facts as her federal claims. However, it dismissed both claims without prejudice.

As to Forgey, the court held that refusing an extension and assigning a failing grade, regardless of Forgey’s motive, did not meet New York’s high standard for conduct that is extreme and outrageous. As to Robinson, the court held that the alleged one-time remote incident, without a threat of physical contact or a continuing pattern of harassment, did not sufficiently allege extreme and outrageous conduct. The court also found that Morin had not adequately alleged severe emotional distress or causation.

Title IX sexual-harassment claim

The court dismissed Morin’s Title IX sexual-harassment claim against Fordham without prejudice. A university may be liable under Title IX when it has actual knowledge of serious harassment and responds with deliberate indifference, meaning a response that is clearly unreasonable in light of the known circumstances. The court concluded that Fordham’s alleged prompt suspension of Robinson, no-contact directive, investigation, and termination were not clearly unreasonable and therefore did not show deliberate indifference.

Title IX retaliation claim

The court denied Fordham’s motion to dismiss Morin’s Title IX retaliation claim. The court treated Morin’s report of the alleged sexual misconduct as protected activity. It concluded that Morin plausibly alleged adverse school-related actions through Forgey’s refusal to grant an extension and decision to give her an F, as well as the alleged handling of her grade appeal and withholding of information about course availability. The court also found that the timing of these events plausibly supported a connection between Morin’s report and the alleged retaliation.

Disposition

Judge Nelson S. Roman’s order granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motions to dismiss. The court dismissed without prejudice the Title IX sexual-harassment claim against Fordham, the Title VII hostile-environment claim against Fordham, the federal civil-rights claims against Robinson and Forgey, and the emotional-distress claims against Robinson and Forgey. The court denied Fordham’s motion to dismiss the Title IX retaliation claim. Morin had until October 28, 2022, to file an amended complaint. If she failed to do so, the claims dismissed without prejudice would be deemed dismissed with prejudice.