Jennings v.

University of North Carolina

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals
482 F.3d 686 (4th Cir. 2007)

Key Search Terms: sexual harassment, Title IX, coach, women’s college
soccer, University of North Carolina (UNC), hostile environment

Facts
Melissa Jennings, a former student and soccer player at the UNC, claimed that
her coach, Anson Dorrance, persistently and openly pried into and discussed
the sex lives of his players and made sexually charged comments, thereby
creating a hostile environment in the women’s soccer program. Jennings also
sued UNC and Susan Ehringhaus, Assistant to the Chancellor and legal
counsel to UNC. The Fourth Circuit affirmed UNC’s summary judgment;
however, the Fourth Circuit did rehear the case en banc.

Issue
Whether Jennings’ action under Title IX and § 1983 against UNC and various
coaches and school officials, alleging hostile environment sexual harassment
could survive UNC’s summary judgment.

Holding
The Fourth Circuit applied a four factor test to establish a Title IX claim on the
basis of sexual harassment finding that Jennings met all of the prongs. First,
plaintiff must prove that she was a student at a federally funded educational
institution. This was easily met because UNC is a federally funded university.
Second, plaintiff must prove that she was subjected to harassment based on
her sex. The court held that Dorrance’s persistent, sex-oriented discussions,
both in team settings and in private, were degrading and humiliating to his
players because they were women. Third, plaintiff must prove that the
harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile or abusive
environment in an educational program or activity. The court found that
Dorrance’s persistent sexual harassment was sufficiently degrading to young
women to create a hostile and abusive environment. This was especially true
because he was and still is the most successful women’s college soccer coach
in U.S. history with considerable power in the women’s soccer world. Finally,
plaintiff must show that there is a basis for imputing liability to the institution.
In this case, Jennings met with the Assistant to the Chancellor giving her vivid
details of Dorrance’s sexual comments who then instructed Jennings to work
out her problems directly with the coach. Thus, Jennings demonstrated that
UNC had actual notice of the hostile environment and failed to take any action.
UNC’s deliberate indifference created liability under Title IX. The court vacated
the granting the UNC’s motion for summary judgment and remanded.

Summarized by: Lucy Wess