By Judy Clabes
NKyTribune editor
In response to a motion for sanctions in the Jane Doe vs. Northern Kentucky University, NKU’s attorneys have filed a response asking for a hearing and saying that its actions were taken in good faith.
The suit is being heard in Senior Judge William Bertleman’s 6th District U.S. Court. The response was filed by NKU’s new counsel Jeffrey Mando of Adams, Stepner, Woltermann & Dusing and three attorneys in the Sturgill, Turner, Barker & Moloney firm in Lexington.
It involves the suit of a young woman, then a freshman at NKU, who claims she was raped in a campus dorm and says NKU did not take adequate subsequent steps to assure her safety on campus. Her alleged attacker continued to be a student at NKU. Jane Doe is now a senior.
In asking for sanctions, Jane Doe — through her attorney Kevin Murphy, cited instances in which NKU failed to turn over documents necessary to her defense and to deposing of witnesses until it was too late to use the documents to inform the questioning.
NKU’s 40-page response says that many of the documents produced late were publicly available online or otherwise, were cumulative in nature or not of substance to “Plaintiff’s theory of the case.”
The response also says that Jane Doe has “engaged in extensive discovery of matters unrelated to her claims” and says that “the records establish those claims are markedly different and have absolutely no bearing on” whether NKU was deliberately indifferent to her.
Arguing that NKU conducted a “good faith thorough and diligent search for the records,” the motion outlines a search process that involved dozens of on-campus officials and staff, producing thousands of pages of documents including those related to Clery Act and Title IX records — and to ensure Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) obligations.
Dedication to the privacy requirements of FERPA increased the time required to produce certain documents, NKU explains in detail.
The motion says that “even though NKU acted in good faith and with due diligence throughout discovery,” some new documents were uncovered in their process but “none of those actions were taken in bad faith.”
NKU also argues that “late productions have not prejudiced the Plaintiff” and goes into detail on several of the document requests.
A final pretrial conference date for the case has been set for May 3 in Judge William O. Bertelsman’s U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Kentucky.
A settlement conference was on the court’s schedule for last week, but no record has been released.
NKU has also filed a motion for summary judgment.
To see NKU’s motion against sanctions in full, click here.