Michigan State University Sued for Equal Protection, Due Process Violations

John Doe filed a lawsuit against Michigan State University in federal court recently, claiming he was unfairly suspended following a false accusation from a woman with whom he had consensual sex after a frat party. The lawsuit has been added to our Legal Database with full details and the Complaint file.

Here’s an excerpt from an article in WILX 10 out of Lansing, MI:

Lawyers for the man say the investigation was flawed for several reasons, including:

– One of the lead investigators has a background as a sex crime prosecutor and he approached the case from a prosecutorial stance rather than as a neutral fact-finder.
– Investigators did not give the man adequate notice and details about the case, indicating the investigation was tainted by the outset by gender bias and a presumption of his guilt.
– The man was not offered a live hearing or an opportunity to cross-examine the alleged victim or witnesses.
– Investigators did not properly vet the woman’s witnesses.
– With no witnesses to the actual alleged assault itself, the resolution was just a “credibility contest” between the man and the woman.
– The man lost that contest due to “gender bias on the part of the investigator and intense pressure at Michigan State to convict the males accused of sexual assault.”
– The lawsuit also claims that investigators ignored inconsistencies and physical impossibilities in the woman’s story.

From the complaint file:

Denied equal protection under the law as well as the most fundamental guarantees of due process—without a hearing, without any opportunity to cross-examine his accuser—Plaintiff John Doe (“Plaintiff,” “Doe,” or “John Doe”) was falsely declared guilty of sexual assault and suspended by Michigan State University (“Michigan State” or “University”).

As a result, Plaintiff, though innocent of any wrongdoing, has sustained tremendous damages, including, without limitation, emotional distress, psychological damages, loss of educational and career opportunities, reputational damages, economic injuries and other direct and consequential damages.

We will follow the case and make updates to our Title IX Lawsuits Database as the suit develops.

Thank You for Reading

If you like what you have read, feel free to sign up for our newsletter here:

Support Our Work

If you like our work, consider supporting it via a donation or signing up for a database.

About the Author

Title IX for All is a U.S.-based organization that advocates fairness and equal treatment in education. Our main activities are database development, writing, counseling, publishing, research, public speaking, and networking.

More from Title IX for All

Accused Students Database

Research due process and similar lawsuits by students accused of Title IX violations (sexual assault, harassment, dating violence, stalking, etc.) in higher education.

OCR Resolutions Database

Research resolved Title IX investigations of K-12 and postsecondary institutions by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR).

Attorneys Directory

A basic directory for looking up Title IX attorneys, most of whom have represented parties in litigation by accused students.

John Doe filed a lawsuit against Michigan State University in federal court recently, claiming he was unfairly suspended following a false accusation from a woman with whom he had consensual sex after a frat party. The lawsuit has been added to our Legal Database with full details and the Complaint file.

Here’s an excerpt from an article in WILX 10 out of Lansing, MI:

Lawyers for the man say the investigation was flawed for several reasons, including:

– One of the lead investigators has a background as a sex crime prosecutor and he approached the case from a prosecutorial stance rather than as a neutral fact-finder.
– Investigators did not give the man adequate notice and details about the case, indicating the investigation was tainted by the outset by gender bias and a presumption of his guilt.
– The man was not offered a live hearing or an opportunity to cross-examine the alleged victim or witnesses.
– Investigators did not properly vet the woman’s witnesses.
– With no witnesses to the actual alleged assault itself, the resolution was just a “credibility contest” between the man and the woman.
– The man lost that contest due to “gender bias on the part of the investigator and intense pressure at Michigan State to convict the males accused of sexual assault.”
– The lawsuit also claims that investigators ignored inconsistencies and physical impossibilities in the woman’s story.

From the complaint file:

Denied equal protection under the law as well as the most fundamental guarantees of due process—without a hearing, without any opportunity to cross-examine his accuser—Plaintiff John Doe (“Plaintiff,” “Doe,” or “John Doe”) was falsely declared guilty of sexual assault and suspended by Michigan State University (“Michigan State” or “University”).

As a result, Plaintiff, though innocent of any wrongdoing, has sustained tremendous damages, including, without limitation, emotional distress, psychological damages, loss of educational and career opportunities, reputational damages, economic injuries and other direct and consequential damages.

We will follow the case and make updates to our Title IX Lawsuits Database as the suit develops.