Emeldi

Emeldi v. University of Oregon

Good Law
673 F.3d 1218·2012 WL 933821·2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 5864
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 21, 201210-35551California21,236 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Gould, J.

Opinion by Judge GOULD; Dissent by Judge FISHER.

OPINION

In Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, the Supreme Court held that retaliation by a federally funded educational institution against someone who complains of gender discrimination is actionable under Title IX. 544 U.S. 167, 171 , 125 S.Ct. 1497 , 161 L.Ed.2d 361 (2005). We must decide what a plaintiff must prove to prevail on a Title IX retaliation claim, and whether plaintiff Monica Emeldi adduced sufficient evidence of her claim to overcome summary judgment.

I

Monica Emeldi sued the University of Oregon, alleging that it prevented her from completing a Ph.D. program in retaliation for having complained of gender-based institutional bias in the University’s Ph.D. program, and gender discrimination by her faculty dissertation committee chair.

Emeldi was a Ph.D. student in the University of Oregon’s College of Education, in its Department of Special Education. Her advisor and dissertation committee chair, Edward Kame’enui, took a sabbatical starting in the fall of 2005. Emeldi asked Robert Horner, another professor, to replace Kame’enui as her dissertation chair. Horner agreed. During the time of Emeldi’s work with…

dissent Opinion

Fisher, J.

dissenting:

I generally agree with much of what my colleagues have to say about extending the principles and jurisprudence developed under Title VII to the context of discrimina: tion against women in colleges and universities under the rubric of Title IX. Ms. Emeldi, however, has not shown that the problems she experienced in her Ph.D. program, and particularly with her supervising faculty advisor, Dr. Horner, were the result of gender discrimination rather than an unfortunate — but not unlawful— breakdown in the academic relationship between a master professor and a graduate student. The record plainly reveals Emeldi’s frustration with her lack of progress on completing her Ph.D. studies and her dissertation, including problems she attributed to Horner as her dissertation chair. She became so frustrated that she finally complained to University administrators. She may have believed these problems and Dr. Horner’s actions were caused by his bias against her as a woman. But this is a retaliation case, where it is critical that she present evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that Horner (a) knew she believed him to be gender biased, and (b) resigned in retaliation…

Opinion

Denise Gale Fjordbeck, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Oregon Attorney General, Salem, OR, for the University of Oregon.

Before: RAYMOND C. FISHER, RONALD M. GOULD, and RICHARD A. PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion by Judge GOULD; Dissent by Judge FISHER.

GOULD, Circuit Judge:

In Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, the Supreme Court held that retaliation by a federally funded educational institution against someone who complains of gender discrimination is actionable under Title IX. 544 U.S. 167, 171 , 125 S.Ct. 1497 , 161 L.Ed.2d 361 (2005). We must decide what a plaintiff must prove to prevail on a Title IX retaliation claim, and whether plaintiff Monica Emeldi adduced sufficient evidence of her claim to overcome summary judgment.

Monica Emeldi sued the University of Oregon, alleging that it prevented her from completing a Ph.D. program in retaliation for having complained of gender-based institutional bias in the University's Ph.D. program, and gender discrimination by her faculty dissertation committee chair.

Emeldi was a Ph.D. student in the University of Oregon's College of Education, in its Department of Special Education. Her advisor and dissertation…

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.