+
KANSAN.COM
+
NEWS
None of the new facts alleged support a claim of deliberate indifference by the University."
KU opposes motion to amend Title IX case, says it did not deliberately mislead Tackett
University response to the motion to amend complaint
CONNER MITCHELL
@connermitchellO
The University filed a response Friday in federal court opposing Daisy Tackett's motion to amend and include new information in her Title IX complaint.
The new information alleges the University was deliberately indifferent and misled Tackett regarding the disciplinary actions for the student she said sexually assaulted her. The response argues Tackett's claims are "futile."
"None of the new facts alleged support a claim of deliberate indifference by the University," the response says.
Tackett's motion to amend her complaint said she was notified in February that the Office for Institutional Opportunity and Access recommended that the student be permanently expelled from the University. On March 18, the University informed Tackett that the student had been withdrawn from the University as of March 17.
said he would "[be] allowed to withdraw in lieu of expulsion."
The University's response argues Tackett "knew, or should have known" about the status of the student due to clear communications from University administrators made to her and her attorney.
The motion also says media reports surfaced in September indicating the student received a different letter than Tackett, which
"Even if Plaintiff misunderstood Dr. [Tammara] Durham's March 18,2016 letter, the facts do not support Plaintiff's claims that the University was deliberately indifferent to her when it acted to remove John Doe G from campus," the response says.
Another point of contention in Tackett's motion surrounds the nonacademic misconduct notation placed on the student's transcript at the time of his withdrawal from the University. The motion argues that the lack of specificity of the notation allowed the student to enroll and play football at another university. A number of reasons could have contributed to the student's enrollment at another university, the University's response says, but the University itself is not at fault.
"...[The] University of Kansas did not and does not have an affirmative duty to
Plaintiff to ensure that John Doe G never finishes his education at another university," the response reads.
Dan Curry, Tackett's lawyer, previously told the Kansan if the University opposed the motion to amend the complaint, a judge would have to rule on whether the new information would be included in the original complaint.
"We felt it necessary to amend to include these new facts which have just come to light," Curry said. "We thought it would be appropriate to paint the whole picture of what was going on with those representations."
Retirement income depends on asset allocation decisions and income strategies chosen during accumulation and retirement phases. Results based on our analysis of participants in TIAA employer-sponsored retirement plans. TIAA-CREF Individual & Institutional Services, LLC. TIAA-CREF products are subject to market and other risk factors. C32708