Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

  • Reply to threads, and start your own.
  • Post reviews of your campus visits.
  • Find hundreds of pages of informative articles.
  • Search from over 3 million scholarships.
Please take a moment to read our updated TOS, Privacy Policy, and Forum Rules.

Columbia settles with Nungesser


Replies to: Columbia settles with Nungesser

  • HarvestMoon1HarvestMoon1 Registered User Posts: 5,996 Senior Member
    Yes I get what he was trying to argue and think the first 2 examples make some sense. The last one not so much.
  • turtle17turtle17 Registered User Posts: 98 Junior Member
    The key point for the actual suit and the settling of it is as Ohiodad wrote "Since that point, the ground has shifted under Columbia, most specifically with the 2nd Circuit's decisions in Doe and Littlejohn. Given those two decisions, and even with an extraordinarily sympathetic trial judge, competent lawyers advising Columbia (and you can bet they are competent) were telling Columbia that it was very likely some depositions would be taken and paper discovery conducted before they would get another chance to get the case tossed."

  • ConsolationConsolation Registered User Posts: 21,643 Senior Member
    We should all take a breath and stop with the victim blaming. Just because the university didn't discipline him doesn't mean he wasn't responsible. Ms. Sulkowics was not the only person to claim he engaged in sexual misconduct. There were two other women. Ms. Sulkowics claimed she was brutally raped and beaten

    Having read all about this case in multiple sources over a long period of time *I* don't need to take a breath. I suggest that you read about ALL of the details of this case, including the emails Emma S sent to him, before you take it upon yourself to decide that he is the liar here.
  • momofthreeboysmomofthreeboys Registered User Posts: 15,342 Senior Member
    That is a unique perspective given what is known.
  • collegedad13collegedad13 Registered User Posts: 514 Member
    @momofthreeboys I would be happy to share with you the Docket and courts opinion in the case if you would like. It is about 65 pages total. It is the courts perspective.
  • momofthreeboysmomofthreeboys Registered User Posts: 15,342 Senior Member
    No need. The defense got their case together and I've been watching it as it progressed plus the case was not about rape. The uni and the police had settled that issue several years ago by declining to pursue in the case of the police and the uni finding that all the accusations were unsupported. As with most of the cases, thus one is about universities acting in a prejudicial manner as in this case or denying fundamental civil rights as in other cases. The issues that have bothered me the most since the Dear College letter was released.
  • collegedad13collegedad13 Registered User Posts: 514 Member
    That is correct the 4 accusers believed in regards to their claims of rape and beating women up
    universities acting in a prejudicial manner

    For the record Columbia never said the claims were unsupported only that the office of Gender based misconduct declined to take action based upon the claims
  • roethlisburgerroethlisburger Registered User Posts: 1,675 Senior Member
    @HarvestMoon1 Then he topped off that argument with pointing out that Columbia's sexual violence policy focused only on penetration and never addressed a man being "made to penetrate." No idea where he was going with that one.

    Do you really not know or are you being sarcastic?
  • bestmom888bestmom888 Registered User Posts: 47 Junior Member
    @collegedad13 I am sure Columbia, not lacking in excellent representation, apologized and settled for a good reason.
  • momofthreeboysmomofthreeboys Registered User Posts: 15,342 Senior Member
    Lol true. I imagine the Yale attorneys are spending their time figuring out what their offer might be when it is their day of reckoning. Judges don't seem to be inclined to allow unis to behave badly these days.
  • collegedad13collegedad13 Registered User Posts: 514 Member
    @momofthreeboys Columbia won!!! The only person who behaved badly was Nungesser for filing a frivolous lawsuit. My offer still stands to send you the courts order showing that Columbia won. Nungessers second amended complaint was particularly bizarre with strange hypotheticals.
  • HannaHanna Registered User Posts: 14,214 Senior Member
    "I have raised my son to understand "no means no""

    This advice is out of date. Lots of accused kids are found responsible even when accusers do not claim that they said no.

    "Columbia won!!!"

    Columbia won important victories in the district court. In the court of Google -- which may matter more to this plaintiff -- this looks like a great outcome for Nungesser.

    I have been an expert witness in several similar cases (I have no involvement with this one and don't know anything more about it than the public record). Columbia's statement has enormous value for the plaintiff. You have to move heaven and earth to get a public statement like that out of a gigantic, rich university, especially in a case where the statement will get international press coverage. I can't think of any other case with this kind of outcome. I thought of the Sterett-Michigan public settlement (link below) as favorable to the accused student, but this is another level.


    While some lawyers might take a case pro bono, students who sue universities over Title IX matters generally have a lot of family resources. That's true whether they are accusers or accused. I don't know any attorneys who take Title IX cases on contingency. So we're mostly talking about families with six figures to spend. Some of them eat six figures for breakfast. They may not expect to collect a lot of money, and they may not care. A public apology might have been their ideal outcome from day 1.
  • tonymomtonymom Registered User Posts: 994 Member
    edited July 17
    Let me elaborate....
    My son does not disrespect women. Ply them with alcohol to take advantage of them. He does not use derogatory language to discuss their bodies. He understands if there is a situation at a social gathering and there is drinking going on to not make "contact" as consent under those circumstances is tricky. His HS did a very good job of talking about these issues in a frank and straight forward fashion. It was an all boys school so they made an issue about educating men of virtue. That "virtue" was not treating women as objects.
    "No means no" was meant as watershed or indicator for a variety of responses that would indicate personal integrity on his part. Sorry if I was unclear.

    I don't pretend to know what actually went on between these two students. We will likely never know.
Sign In or Register to comment.