Doe

Doe v. Regents of the Univ. of California

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 6, 2026A170234California6,639 words

Opinion

Opinion

Richman, J.

BACKGROUND

The General Setting In March 2019, three University students filed complaints against Doe claiming that in three incidents—in November 2017, November 2018, and March 2019—an intoxicated Doe became increasingly violent and hostile with them and forced them to engage in sexual activity without their consent. For consistency with the trial court, we refer to the complainants as Roe 1, Roe 2, and Roe 3. The complaints would lead to extensive proceedings at the University held in accordance with what was and is referred to as “Appendix E,” a document that sets forth the five “stages” involved in the administrative process.1 We do not understand Doe to assert error in connection with any of

Appendix E is formally “PACAOS-Appendix-E: Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Student Investigation and Adjudication Framework for Non-Doe-Covered Conduct,” and outlines the University’s process for resolving reports of sexual violence and sexual harassment when the parties involved are students and the complained-of conduct does not fall under the specific purview of the United States Department of Education’s Title IX regulations.

2 the stages other than his inability to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.