Doe v. University of St. Thomas

Doe v. University of St. Thomas

Plaintiff:	John Doe
Defendant:	University of St. Thomas
Case Number:	0:2016cv01127
Filed:	April 29, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office:	DMN Office
County:	Ramsey
Presiding Judge:	Katherine M. Menendez
Presiding Judge:	John R. Tunheim
Nature of Suit:	Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action:	20 U.S.C. § 1681
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
February 21, 2019	Filing 296 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; granting 128 Motion for Summary Judgment; LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. (Written Opinion) Signed by Chief Judge John R. Tunheim on 2/21/2019. (JMK)
March 1, 2017	Filing 63 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part defendant's 43 Motion to Dismiss. The motion is GRANTED as to Counts, I, II, III, IV, and V. Plaintiff's claims for Declaratory Judgment (Count I), Breach of Contract (C ount IV), and Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing (Count V) are dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff's claims for Violation of Title IX Erroneous Outcome (Count II) and Violation of Title IX Deliberate Indifference (Count III) are dismissed without prejudice. The motion is DENIED with respect to the negligence claims found in Count VI of the Amended Complaint.(Written Opinion) Signed by Chief Judge John R. Tunheim on March 1, 2017. (DML)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 21, 2019

Filing 296 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; granting 128 Motion for Summary Judgment; LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. (Written Opinion) Signed by Chief Judge John R. Tunheim on 2/21/2019. (JMK)

March 1, 2017

Filing 63 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part defendant's 43 Motion to Dismiss. The motion is GRANTED as to Counts, I, II, III, IV, and V. Plaintiff's claims for Declaratory Judgment (Count I), Breach of Contract (C ount IV), and Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing (Count V) are dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff's claims for Violation of Title IX Erroneous Outcome (Count II) and Violation of Title IX Deliberate Indifference (Count III) are dismissed without prejudice. The motion is DENIED with respect to the negligence claims found in Count VI of the Amended Complaint.(Written Opinion) Signed by Chief Judge John R. Tunheim on March 1, 2017. (DML)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Doe v. University of St. Thomas
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: John Doe
Represented By:	Beau D McGraw
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: University of St. Thomas
Represented By:	Ellen A Brinkman
Represented By:	Maren F Grier
Represented By:	Michael M Sawers
Represented By:	David A Schooler
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?