Connecticut District Court allows Title IX Employment Claim to Proceed

Connecticut District Court allows Title IX Employment Claim to Proceed and Denies Motion to Dismiss

Yet another district court has allowed a Title IX employment claim to survive a motion to dismiss. Doe v. Cent. Connecticut State Univ., No. 3:19CV418 (MPS), 2020 WL 1169296, at *7 (D. Conn. Mar. 11, 2020).

As many Title IX advocates are aware there is a split of authority as to whether a gender based employment claim (other than retaliation based on an underlying complaint of student discrimination) is cognizable under Title IX. Some courts have held that Title VII preempts Tile IX and Title VII is the exclusive remedy for a gender based employment claim while other courts have held that the two statutes are co-extensive, meaning a plaintiff can bring a claim under either or both statutes.

Although the issue remains undecided in the Second Circuit, the Connecticut District Court followed the rationales of  Doe v. Mercy Catholic Med. Ctr., 850 F.3d 545, 549, 564 (3d Cir. 2017), Hauff v. State Univ. of New York, No. 18CV7256, 2019 WL 6498256, at *8 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 3, 2019), and Kohlhausen v. SUNY Rockland Cnty. Coll., 2011 WL 1404934 at *9 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2011) abrogated on other grounds by Leitner v. Westchester Cmty. Coll., 779 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2015) holding that Title VII does not foreclose a Title IX claim.