A recently-filed lawsuit, Justice v. Texas Tech, shows how easily universities can be sued by complainants (accusers) in sexual misconduct proceedings and how that can inform respondents (the accused) in such proceedings. Haley Justice was a student at Texas Tech who alleged that a fellow student raped her on November 5, 2023. She reported it to the university the next day. On December 2, 2023, she signed a consent form acknowledging that she agreed to resolve the process through informal resolution.
Informal resolution (also called adaptable or alternative resolution depending on the school) is a process whereby parties in a school sexual misconduct grievance procedure can voluntarily resolve the case early and on mutually-agreed terms without proceeding all the way through the process to a final adjudication on the merits. It is essentially a more informal method of mediation. Informal resolution is not always available and simply initiating the process requires both parties and the school to agree. Once that happens, the parties exchange terms and try to find ones they can all agree on. Once that happens, the parties can then resolve the case by signing a form. The complainant signed such a form on June 4, 2024.
The lawsuit, however, alleges that the complainant was coerced into resolving the complaint via informal resolution:
Texas Tech SCRMS employees took advantage of Plaintiff’s fragile situation after the rape to pressure Plaintiff to agree to an informal resolution by constantly repeating that a formal grievance process would force Plaintiff to relive her trauma over and over, and that the process could take a long time to finish with no certainty of a satisfying outcome.
The above statement represents the total substance of the plaintiff’s arguments regarding coercion. What is most impressive it is the lack of specific information. There are no dates (actual or approximate) associated with these alleged statements of pressure by Texas Tech employees. There are also no quotes (actual or approximate) to indicate what these employees may have said. The plaintiff has not submitted any exhibits (commonly filed at the same time as the lawsuit itself) substantiating this coercion. Those exhibits could be emails, witness statements, case records, or even recorded meetings and interactions. The plaintiff could have even submitted contemporaneous statements (messages, emails, etc.) she sent to supportive friends or family members indicating that she felt pressured to signing such an agreement while the informal resolution process was ongoing – if such evidence existed.
As for Texas Tech, it has denied any pressure or coercion in its answer, stated that the agreement was willfully and voluntarily signed, and pointed to the complainant having the opportunity to review the agreement alongside any advisor of her choice. Given that the evidence presented so far tends to favor Texas Tech, what most likely happened was not an act of pressure by the university but rather that university employees explained the pros and cons of informal resolution. At that time, the complainant weighed the terms and found them agreeable, but she now regrets making that decision.
Those who are new to the world of school sexual misconduct grievance procedures should take these lessons from this story:
- Informal resolutions are a compromise. Compromises inevitably involve giving something up to get something else. It is rare for a party to get everything they want; that’s why it’s a compromise. You should consider informal resolution agreements carefully and not only based on how you feel right now but also how you will feel later.
- It is true that schools must be careful not to appear as though they are advocating for either party in the informal resolution process. The parties may exchange and agree upon terms, but it is not the proper role of the school to attempt to “sell” those terms to either party – and it is not a good idea to ask them to. You wouldn’t want them doing that on the other party’s behalf, either.
If you are a student accused of sexual misconduct, informal resolution may be an available option. If it is, the timing and specifics of the terms you propose are a strategic decision best made with the assistance of an experienced advisor. Learn more about our affordable advisory service here.
Thank You for Reading
If you like what you have read, feel free to sign up for our newsletter here:
About the Author
Related Posts
A recently-filed lawsuit, Justice v. Texas Tech, shows how easily universities can be sued by complainants (accusers) in sexual misconduct proceedings and how that can inform respondents (the accused) in such proceedings. Haley Justice was a student at Texas Tech who alleged that a fellow student raped her on November 5, 2023. She reported it to the university the next day. On December 2, 2023, she signed a consent form acknowledging that she agreed to resolve the process through informal resolution.
Informal resolution (also called adaptable or alternative resolution depending on the school) is a process whereby parties in a school sexual misconduct grievance procedure can voluntarily resolve the case early and on mutually-agreed terms without proceeding all the way through the process to a final adjudication on the merits. It is essentially a more informal method of mediation. Informal resolution is not always available and simply initiating the process requires both parties and the school to agree. Once that happens, the parties exchange terms and try to find ones they can all agree on. Once that happens, the parties can then resolve the case by signing a form. The complainant signed such a form on June 4, 2024.
The lawsuit, however, alleges that the complainant was coerced into resolving the complaint via informal resolution:
Texas Tech SCRMS employees took advantage of Plaintiff’s fragile situation after the rape to pressure Plaintiff to agree to an informal resolution by constantly repeating that a formal grievance process would force Plaintiff to relive her trauma over and over, and that the process could take a long time to finish with no certainty of a satisfying outcome.
The above statement represents the total substance of the plaintiff’s arguments regarding coercion. What is most impressive it is the lack of specific information. There are no dates (actual or approximate) associated with these alleged statements of pressure by Texas Tech employees. There are also no quotes (actual or approximate) to indicate what these employees may have said. The plaintiff has not submitted any exhibits (commonly filed at the same time as the lawsuit itself) substantiating this coercion. Those exhibits could be emails, witness statements, case records, or even recorded meetings and interactions. The plaintiff could have even submitted contemporaneous statements (messages, emails, etc.) she sent to supportive friends or family members indicating that she felt pressured to signing such an agreement while the informal resolution process was ongoing – if such evidence existed.
As for Texas Tech, it has denied any pressure or coercion in its answer, stated that the agreement was willfully and voluntarily signed, and pointed to the complainant having the opportunity to review the agreement alongside any advisor of her choice. Given that the evidence presented so far tends to favor Texas Tech, what most likely happened was not an act of pressure by the university but rather that university employees explained the pros and cons of informal resolution. At that time, the complainant weighed the terms and found them agreeable, but she now regrets making that decision.
Those who are new to the world of school sexual misconduct grievance procedures should take these lessons from this story:
- Informal resolutions are a compromise. Compromises inevitably involve giving something up to get something else. It is rare for a party to get everything they want; that’s why it’s a compromise. You should consider informal resolution agreements carefully and not only based on how you feel right now but also how you will feel later.
- It is true that schools must be careful not to appear as though they are advocating for either party in the informal resolution process. The parties may exchange and agree upon terms, but it is not the proper role of the school to attempt to “sell” those terms to either party – and it is not a good idea to ask them to. You wouldn’t want them doing that on the other party’s behalf, either.
If you are a student accused of sexual misconduct, informal resolution may be an available option. If it is, the timing and specifics of the terms you propose are a strategic decision best made with the assistance of an experienced advisor. Learn more about our affordable advisory service here.
