A federal decide has thrown out the lawsuit of a College of Denver professor who claimed that he was defamed and denied a educating contract as a result of he’s a person.
David Schott, a regulation professor who additionally runs DU’s trial advocacy program, sued the school greater than two-and-a-half years in the past, in June 2021. He accused DU of discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title IX, a federal regulation that prohibits favoritism on the premise of intercourse.
However U.S. District Decide Christine Arguello decided Jan. 4 that Schott has not been discriminated towards and, in reality, has not suffered any profession setbacks in any respect.
“Mr. Schott doesn’t dispute that he stays employed at Sturm Faculty of Regulation in the identical place, with the identical titles,” the decide wrote. “It is usually undisputed that Mr. Schott’s wage has not decreased, and he has obtained advantage wage will increase.”
An legal professional for Schott, Brian Moore, mentioned that Arguello’s choice doesn’t shut the case.
“We expect that ruling was clear error, and intend to enchantment. Virtually anybody who doesn’t get pleasure from a lifetime appointment would agree that stripping somebody of job safety is a major opposed motion,” Moore mentioned in a lightweight jab on the decide, who has a lifetime appointment.
Schott’s saga started in 2016, when DU obtained stories from feminine regulation college students of sexism throughout the trial advocacy program. One scholar mentioned that Schott had requested her and different girls whether or not their husbands accepted of them being on the trial workforce and criticized her for complaining in regards to the intercourse jokes {that a} male scholar instructed, Arguello’s ruling states.
Schott, who had been a professor for 11 years by then, denied the allegations and requested the college to analyze. It didn’t, however DU and Schott agreed that the trial advocacy program would require anti-discrimination coaching and enhance its anti-discrimination pointers.
In 2018, it got here time for Schott to reapply for a seven-year educating contract. An affiliate dean at DU, tasked with offering data on Schott to a school evaluate committee, made reference to the scholars’ allegations of sexism in 2016, together with complaints from Schott’s feminine colleagues. The committee spoke to Schott, who denied all allegations.
That college evaluate committee, together with a second committee shaped in 2019, beneficial that Schott not be given one other seven-year contract. DU agreed.
Schott alleges that the affiliate regulation faculty dean, Viva Moffat, was retaliating towards him as a result of he had reported a sexist and racist remark of hers to the dean of the regulation faculty. Schott claims that Moffat instructed him in 2016 that she did “not wish to see white males educating anymore” within the trial advocacy program. Moffat and DU deny she mentioned that.
The case was set to go to a jury trial in Might of this 12 months. Earlier than it may, DU requested Arguello to dismiss the case. The decide heard from each side, then sided with DU.
As a way to allege employment discrimination and retaliation, Schott first wanted to indicate there had been a unfavorable impact on his employment, Arguello decided. He couldn’t.
“Mr. Schott acknowledged that he has not sought medical remedy, has not been fired, his pay has not been diminished, and he has obtained advantage raises from the college within the years following the 2016 allegations and his contract nonrenewal,” she wrote Jan. 4.
With that, the decide threw out Schott’s Title IX declare. She dominated that 10 different claims he made towards DU contain state regulation, not federal regulation, and so don’t belong in her courtroom.
Arguello ordered Schott to pay all legal professional charges and courtroom prices that DU has amassed defending towards his lawsuit over the previous two-and-a-half years. DU has till Jan. 18 to offer an accounting of these charges and prices for the decide’s approval.
“Nothing within the courtroom’s ruling contradicts Professor Schott’s central allegations on this case: that DU defamed him; retaliated towards him for opposing unlawful discrimination; and breached his contract by failing to resume his seven-year appointment,” Moore mentioned Monday. “All of the courtroom did was rule that DU’s refusal to reappoint Professor Schott to a brand new seven-year time period was not a major sufficient opposed motion to assist claims beneath Title IX.”
Moore mentioned that his consumer will now pursue in state courtroom these 10 state regulation claims that Arguello dismissed. They embrace defamation, breach of contract and wage violations.
“Professor Schott has labored tirelessly for DU’s college students for a few years, constructing its extraordinarily profitable advocacy program. He appears to be like ahead to presenting to a jury the proof of how DU has handled him in return, and to receiving the jury’s verdict,” Moore mentioned.
The College of Denver was represented by attorneys Jimmy Goh and Erin Rayner Mangum with the Constangy Brooks Smith & Prophete regulation agency in Denver. They and spokespeople for the college didn’t reply requests for remark in regards to the decide’s choice.
