Title IX lawsuit settled for $2.48 million

[Iam4utalways]

Has a Title IX Lawsuit ever gone to trial or been dismissed? Or are they always settled?

 

[bamawriter]

Has a Title IX Lawsuit ever gone to trial or been dismissed? Or are they always settled?

They are almost always settled.

 

[volfan102455]

Maybe but with Alexis Johnson, it has been 6 months since his allegations were made known and he has still not a review with the student conduct board at UT. That sounds like a process issue to me.

I thought the lawyers from the law suit had filed something to postpone the review which is why it has not been held - I could be mistaken but thought I had read that somewhere.

If that is true, then it is not a process issue but a result of the law suit.

 

[82_VOL_83]

the cases are different..

case 1 is girl versus football player who is accused of a criminal act.

this case was about the review process required by the title IX law that the university was to do not being as expedient as required by the law. The filing by the plaintiffs stated that the slow review process created the culture issue. But the point of the suit was UT was not following the law with their review procedures. Totally different than the criminal cases.

The boys were in said system that paid out. Can only help the plaintiffs in their criminal case.

 

[butchna]

UT could have settled for half that number last fall. turn it down at that time.

How could you know that?

 

[djohnnyg]

Wow. From the standpoint of the athletic program this is a waaaay better result than I would've thought. 2.48 million really is a very small price to pay to put this behind us. This thing was hanging over the programs head like Peyton's b***s over the trainer's head.

But seriously, this seemed like a waaaay bigger deal than something that would be quietly settled for a mere 2.48 mill.

It's done...it's over....we move on.

 

[alwaysvol]

What's left to discuss?

them talking about it every game?

how much you wanna bet this is mentioned every game?

 

[chargervol]

Of course. Being publicly called a slut has never had an effect on anyone's life.

I can't do this, sorry.

Let's all just assume money was their only source of justice.
Plus you got the name calling and feelings and stuff. Great talk.

 

[bamawriter]

I can't do this, sorry.

Let's all just assume money was their only source of justice.
Plus you got the name calling and feelings and stuff. Great talk.

So lawsuits should never get settled. Got it.

 

[chargervol]

So lawsuits should never get settled. Got it.

Lol what?
You asked what we would do if we felt the cops were of no help and we wanted justice.

I answered honestly but you didn't like the answer so I got the PC talking points extravaganza.

Next time don't ask.

 

[joevol33]

I'm glad it's over, but what crap the whole thing was.

 

[bamawriter]

Lol what?
You asked what we would do if we felt the cops were of no help and we wanted justice.

I answered honestly but you didn't like the answer so I got the PC talking points extravaganza.

Next time don't ask.

You answered honestly for someone who hasn't really thought about it. It's not like a criminal trial. The victim doesn't get to keep anonimity if she sues. You're acting like it's a basic thing to publicly go thru a civil trial focused on invading your most private life. And doing all that with no guarantee that you'll win.

Saying a settlement doesn't qualify as "justice" is amazingly shallow thinking.

 

[wfd53]

Can't agree with that. If there was nothing there no way you pay 2mil

It's obvious you've never been involved in a high profile suit. The cost of settling was cheaper than the cost of defense, it's a simple business decision. In addition, it is chump change based on the number of plaintiffs and what they were claiming. It's also a good example of why the losing party should have to pay legal fees. You wouldn't have so many frivolous legal actions.

 

[junder13]

Lol.....without paying lawyers, for eight plaintiffs, it comes out to $310,000 each. Since the lawyers get theirs first.....then taxes. May be enough to buy an average house somewhere.

Settlements on personal injury claims are considered non-taxable income. In the real world where middle class wages are declining and the average household earns around $54k (it was over $57k in 1999, for reference), this is substantial money -- especially when considering how meritless the plaintiffs' joint case was.

*Edit: I did not change what I originally wrote here (which is embarrassing to me now) but upon looking more into the civil suit against UT it appears to me that the university did enable an environment of clemency (at a minimum) and the intention behind the lawsuit (to force change in how UT addresses/approaches a sexual assault case/victim) was both successful and necessary. In that regard, the legitimacy of the 8 individual cases that allowed for a civil case to be filed is secondary to the intent of the suit. It's a shame that some of those 8 cases may be false, but its also unreasonable to assume all eight are false accusations. Either way, the intention of the lawsuit (which again was to force UT to address an environment of clemency towards sexual assault accusations, particularly as they relate to student athletes) was successful.

 

[junder13]

I'm displeased in this settlement. This attorney was going to have to prove all of the accusations he made through his media cohorts and that would have been damn near impossible.

I wish more had this view. Everyone just wants it settled for the sake of ease and for recruiting. The reputation of the university and our athletics program be damned, we don't want to have to hear about this during the football season!

FTR, I don't think the lawsuit played into our 2017 recruiting class being disappointing thus far as many fans would like to believe. But, even if it did, I still would not agree with settling a frivolous and meritless lawsuit.

*Edit: I did not change what I originally wrote here but upon looking more into the civil suit against UT it appears to me that the university did enable an environment of clemency (at a minimum) and the intention behind the lawsuit (to force change in how UT addresses/approaches a sexual assault case/victim) was both successful and necessary. In that regard, UT definitely made the right decision to settle. For the sake of justice, I wish the deposition had been made public so that it would shine light on which administrators (paid public employees) allowed for such (or pushed for such) an environment to exist. I view the settlement terms as a public funding effort (I care not which "pool" of assets it comes from) to protect the identity of those public servants who may have played a role in enabling such an environment. This change in opinion in no way affects my view that tort reform is needed today.

 

[volfan102455]

Settlements on personal injury claims are considered non-taxable income. In the real world where middle class wages are declining and the average household earns around $54k (it was over $57k in 1999, for reference), this is substantial money -- especially when considering how meritless the plaintiffs' joint case was.

This is NOT substantial money. The plaintiffs will end up with less than 200K each. Whether they view this as significant $$'s will depend upon their individual views of money based on their current lifestyle and family situation.

 

[bamawriter]

FTR, I don't think the lawsuit played into our 2017 recruiting class being disappointing thus far as many fans would like to believe. But, even if it did, I still would not agree with settling a frivolous and meritless lawsuit.

Was it frivolous and meritless?

 

[ajvol01]

them talking about it every game?

how much you wanna bet this is mentioned every game?

What's better?

Take it to trial and talk about it from now through 2018 season?

 

[Volfreak1964]

Now on to some Football!

 

[secking]

But, even if it did, I still would not agree with settling a frivolous and meritless lawsuit.

Explain this. You have no clue on either, you only assume.

What IF it had merit and was your daughter? People need to quit regurgitating the idea that 'one of our choir boys wouldnt do such a thing'. Truth is, you don't know, no one does, not on all 8.

No one Wins in this. If the men are falsely accused, people will forever 'judge' them as if they did. That isn't fair if they are innocent. If the women are telling the truth, they are forever scarred and people will forever call it as just a claim for money (and other names), judged by keyboard warriors, and that isn't fair as well.

Using common sense, the chances of all 8 being guilty or not guilty is very, very small. Either side. Civil suits are not set up as guilty/not guilty as some on here think. They were trying to show UT had unfair practices by doing a separate hearing instead of just letting the court system do their job. Nothing Meritless about that because it IS TRUE from the information given in the case, that does need to change, at least partially. Everyone is entitled to impartial justice.

I would suggest not watching/listening to sports media tomorrow because they will use this as an agenda and 'opportunity' for ratings and clicks (sad, disgusting, yet true). Media is all TMZ nowadays, they don't care about the truth or being right anymore.

 

[junder13]

the cases are different..

case 1 is girl versus football player who is accused of a criminal act.

this case was about the review process required by the title IX law that the university was to do not being as expedient as required by the law. The filing by the plaintiffs stated that the slow review process created the culture issue. But the point of the suit was UT was not following the law with their review procedures. Totally different than the criminal cases.

This explains a lot for me. It sounds like this was more of a procedural case than of outright wrongdoing/crime, thus the potential for a jury to rule in favor of the plaintiffs despite little to no criminal evidence. In the end, I suppose A (estimated legal fees for the defendant) + B (percentage chance of unfavorable outcome * estimate of payout awarded by jury) was too high relative to the settlement cost.

It's unfortunate this will come across to those unaware of the details (such as I prior to reading this post) that there might be legitimacy behind the plaintiffs' claims. Some will probably view the settlement as hush money or even an admittance of guilt. I think that's the general perception when a settlement is reached outside of court.

If it were not a procedural matter I would have wanted UT to fight it to the end. But there is no worse outcome than a guilty verdict from the jury. Even if that verdict merely reflects a lapse in proper procedures and the timing of internal on-campus investigations, all the average casual observer would pay attention to is the headline stating that the jury decision went against UT.

*Edit: I did not change what I originally wrote here (which is embarrassing to me now) but upon looking more into the civil suit against UT it appears to me that the university did enable an environment of clemency (at a minimum) and the intention behind the lawsuit (to force change in how UT addresses/approaches a sexual assault case/victim) was both successful and necessary. In that regard, UT definitely made the right decision to settle. For the sake of justice, I wish the deposition had been made public so that it would shine light on which administrators (paid public employees) allowed for such (or pushed for such) an environment to exist. I view the settlement terms as a public funding effort (I care not which "pool" of assets it comes from) to protect the identity of those public servants who may have played a role in enabling such an environment. This change in opinion in no way affects my view that tort reform is needed today.

 

[junder13]

Explain this. You have no clue on either, you only assume.

What IF it had merit and was your daughter? People need to quit regurgitating the idea that 'one of our choir boys wouldnt do such a thing'. Truth is, you don't know, no one does, not on all 8.

No one Wins in this. If the men are falsely accused, people will forever 'judge' them as if they did. That isn't fair if they are innocent. If the women are telling the truth, they are forever scarred and people will forever call it as just a claim for money (and other names), judged by keyboard warriors, and that isn't fair as well.

Using common sense, the chances of all 8 being guilty or not guilty is very, very small. Either side. Civil suits are not set up as guilty/not guilty as some on here think. They were trying to show UT had unfair practices by doing a separate hearing instead of just letting the court system do their job. Nothing Meritless about that because it IS TRUE from the information given in the case, that does need to change, at least partially. Everyone is entitled to impartial justice.

I would suggest not watching/listening to sports media tomorrow because they will use this as an agenda and 'opportunity' for ratings and clicks (sad, disgusting, yet true). Media is all TMZ nowadays, they don't care about the truth or being right anymore.

I agree with a lot of what you say here. I retracted my views after reading from LWS that this became more of a failure on the procedural side on UT's part.

I do not know the merit of each individual case and, if there is merit, there should be consequences to the crime beyond monetary. The joint lawsuit was never an attempt at true justice from my perspective. It was a lawyer-spawned effort to muscle away money from a state institution of higher learning by means of creating a media frenzy and applying reputational pressure on said institution. Hopefully the court of law will properly determine the merit of each individual case (although my confidence in our court system couldn't be any lower). Any case with merit, I would hope for justice above all else (even the sacred cow -- UT football).

I do not read tabloid media nor do I watch TV outside of football season, so that has no influence on my opinion.

*Edit: I did not change what I originally wrote here (which is embarrassing to me now; secking, you offered good advice) but upon looking more into the civil suit against UT it appears to me that the university did enable an environment of clemency (at a minimum) and the intention behind the lawsuit (to force change in how UT addresses/approaches a sexual assault case/victim) was both successful and necessary. In that regard, UT definitely made the right decision to settle. For the sake of justice, I wish the deposition had been made public so that it would shine light on which administrators (paid public employees) allowed for such (or pushed for such) an environment to exist. I view the settlement terms as a public funding effort (I care not which "pool" of assets it comes from) to protect the identity of those public servants who may have played a role in enabling such an environment. This change in opinion in no way affects my view that tort reform is needed today.

 

[secking]

I agree with a lot of what you say here. I retracted my views after reading from LWS that this became more of a failure on the procedural side on UT's part.

I do not know the merit of each individual case and, if there is merit, there should be consequences to the crime beyond monetary. The joint lawsuit was never an attempt at true justice from my perspective. It was a lawyer-spawned effort to muscle away money from a state institution of higher learning by means of creating a media frenzy and applying reputational pressure on said institution. Hopefully the court of law will properly determine the merit of each individual case (although my confidence in our court system couldn't be any lower). Any case with merit, I would hope for justice above all else (even the sacred cow -- UT football).

Yeah, unfortunately the saying of 'good luck finding a good lawyer' comes into play. In most high profile cases, regardless of the content of the trial, lawyers only see the money (or publicity) of the case and not justice those involved, both sides. Not seeking the right thing, rather the selfish thing (for them and their goals).

That said, not all lawyers are bad or greedy, just 'good luck finding a good lawyer'.

 

[junder13]

This is NOT substantial money. The plaintiffs will end up with less than 200K each. Whether they view this as significant $$'s will depend upon their individual views of money based on their current lifestyle and family situation.

Well now, that's just your opinion, isn't it. From my perspective, $200k is way more than what I have so far put into my business and my business hopefully will provide for me the rest of my life. It's also slightly more than what my parents' home cost 10 years ago, and they'll have paid two-to-three times that amount over the full 15-year term of their mortgage. So, yeah, that's a lot of money to me. You must be doing pretty well for yourself if $200k is of no significance in your own life. Congrats.

 

[MustafaRasta]

What if you feel like the cops aren't investigating? What if you feel like the DA doesn't care? What if you feel like the powers that be are closing ranks around your attacker?

I'm not at all saying that happened here. But saying "settling isn't seeking justice" is extremely shallow thinking.

What if you feel like you can say he touched my nunu and you can get a guy's career/education upended?

What if 5 broke chicks get together and file bogus claims and drag a university through the dirt?

If you're argument is for Knoxville police corruption and or them willfully ignoring evidence (like in PA we have numerous untested rape kits, which is relatively common in most states across the country) then maybe it's time for the collective people to get their collective thumbs out of their bum and start paying attention. Community only works if you're a part of it and our "law enforcement" could use some oversight.

What shouldn't happen though is the new guilty until proven innocent approach that's taking place at many universities.

People are so concerned about not prosecuting a real offense that they prosecute every offense under the assumption that the defendant is guilty. All the safeguards are in place for the plaintiff only.

Now, I get it, this title9 was not about rape cases. Though because of this case UT has had to fight off the stigma of "Creating a rape culture". Female coaching staff felt compelled to speak up for their AD and their university in an effort to combat the charge. They were forced to refer to the plaintiffs as victims despite their being no trial. For all any of us know now they can be referred to as lottery winners as much as victims.