Get the latest Syracuse news delivered right to your inbox.
Subscribe to our newsletter here.

A former Syracuse University student is suing the university and two of its officials, claiming they were “deliberately indifferent” and negligent to her complaints of assault and sexual harassment by former lacrosse player Chase Scanlan.

The lawsuit, which was filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York, names Director of Athletics John Wildhack and former men’s lacrosse coach John Desko, as well as SU, as defendants.

SU officials violated federal Title IX policies and failed to appropriately address reports that Scanlan had assaulted multiple students, the civil rights action alleges. The university did not suspend Scanlan until months after it learned of his prior history of violence and reported assaults, the suit claims.

The plaintiff is requesting monetary compensation and injunctive relief that would require SU to obtain outside experts to institute and enforce a comprehensive sexual assault policy.

“The university takes very seriously every report of sexual harassment and assault that it receives,” a university official said in a statement to The Daily Orange. “While we do not comment on pending litigation, we are confident in the University’s strong structure and robust processes for addressing all reports of sexual harassment and assault brought to our attention, all of which are compliant with and guided by federal and state law.”

SU filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit Tuesday, denying any deliberate indifference.

“Nothing could be further from the truth,” SU’s lawyers wrote in the motion. “The University responded immediately and compassionately to (the plaintiff’s) complaints.”

The 87-page lawsuit details a series of violent events involving the plaintiff and other SU students over a multi-year period, during which the plaintiff and Scanlan dated on and off.

Before the alleged assault, Scanlan had struck a men’s lacrosse teammate in the head with a helmet and punched a freshman member of the team without action from SU, the lawsuit alleges. Scanlan was eventually suspended from the team after punching two other players.

On Jan. 5, the plaintiff met with an assistant women’s lacrosse coach to discuss violent behavior and abuse by Scanlan, according to the lawsuit. The coach informed the plaintiff that the disclosed information about Scanlan would be forwarded to SU’s Title IX Office. The Title IX office emailed the plaintiff later in the day, reaching out about the report received by the Title IX office, the motion said.

The Title IX case coordinator asked the plaintiff if she wanted to meet to discuss supportive measures available on campus and her process options through the Title IX office, the motion said.

According to the motion, on Jan. 8 the plaintiff met via video call with a Title IX coordinator who advised her that she could seek a no-contact order or file a formal complaint against Scanlan.

On Jan. 22, the plaintiff emailed the coordinator requesting a no-contact order against Scanlan. On the same day the plaintiff reached out to SU officials, a no-contact order was issued.

Two days after the no-contact order was imposed, the plaintiff requested that the no-contact order be rescinded.

According to the motion, the plaintiff explained, “I do not feel unsafe or as though I am in harms way from Scanlan. I also did not realize that a no contact order resulted in Scanlan not being able to be in the same place as me if we incidentally ended up somewhere and I also do not think that is necessary.”

The university waited until March 8 to remove the order, after asking questions it said demonstrated the plaintiff felt safe.

The plaintiff did not allege that she expressed any concerns to the university between the removal of the no-contact order and the assault several months later.

On April 17, Scanlan shattered the plaintiff’s phone, smashed the wall in her apartment and assaulted her, the lawsuit alleges. Syracuse University’s Department of Public Safety issued an emergency no-contact order on April 18 when the department allegedly became aware of the incident. Officers who initially responded to the assault subjected the plaintiff to “hostile and problematic questioning” in front of Scanlan and then left the plaintiff alone with no supervision, the lawsuit claims.

“The Scanlan assault was the avoidable conclusion of a chain of sexual harassment and domestic violence that included animal abuse, stalking, reproductive coercion and property damage,” the lawsuit reads.

The plaintiff met with an SU Title IX coordinator and her assigned case manager to discuss her options under SU’s Title IX procedures, the suit states. In the meeting, the plaintiff informed officials about alleged claims that two female SU students had also been sexually assaulted by Scanlan in addition to outlining the alleged incidents that she said occurred to her on April 17 and early April 18.

On April 19, head coach Desko suspended Scanlan from the team. Six days later on April 25, SU’s Senior Associate Director of Athletics informed the men’s lacrosse team that Scanlan would be reinstated and allowed to rejoin the team for practice. Later that day, the team held an anonymous vote to gather opinions on kicking Scanlan off the team, the suit states. The vote was 57-1, in favor of kicking Scanlan off the team.

After learning about Scanlan’s reinstatement over social media, the plaintiff emailed an SU Title IX coordinator to discuss a Title IX formal complaint, but she was concerned about SU’s formal complaint procedure requirement of attending the same video meeting as Scanlan.

The plaintiff and SU officials exchanged emails asking about her safety and medical condition that included a bone contusion caused by the alleged domestic incident.

The plaintiff replied asking if the Dean of Students Office can help her construct an email to her professors about the situation. In a second email, the Dean of Students Office asked about her safety concerns around campus and if she would like to arrange a different housing assignment, according to the motion.

On April 26, the plaintiff emailed SU about steps to move forward with a formal complaint.

On April 27, the plaintiff met virtually with an SU Title IX Coordinator who explained the federal Title IX procedures should the plaintiff file a formal complaint. The Title IX Officer explained that the plaintiff would need to appear for a virtual proceeding in front of SU Title IX staff as well as Scanlan, and she would need to be questioned by Scanlan’s advisor.

The officer explained she would not be allowed to turn off her camera during the video call, and she would not be allowed to turn off the screen showing Scanlan. She would only be allowed to use a Post-it note to cover part of her screen, but she could not cover her video camera, the lawsuit said.

The plaintiff said she was uncomfortable with the prospect of being on the same video call as Scanlan and told the officer she would not move forward with a formal Title IX complaint due to the requirement that she would have to confront Scanlan during the process. She stated that she would fully cooperate with SU’s Title IX complaint against Scanlan and confirm information she previously reported to the university, the suit said.

On April 29, the plaintiff’s mother emailed Wildhack to express her concern over SU’s handling of recent events. A courtesy copy of the email was sent to Gary Gait, Mary Kelly — the plaintiff’s Title IX Coordinator — Kimberly Keenan Kirkpatrick and Kent Syverud.

In response, a video call was arranged with the plaintiff’s mother and stepfather. At the meeting, Wildhack stated that Desko made the decision to reinstate Scanlan, the lawsuit said. Deputy General Counsel Gabe Nugent attempted to cast light on Scanlan’s reinstatement stating that, “part of the benefit of reinstating Scanlan was that there would be more eyes on Scanlan and his whereabouts would be additionally monitored by his reporting to lacrosse practice,” the suit stated.

The two SU officials also described safety monitoring and escort services that SU could provide should the plaintiff return to campus.

When the plaintiff returned to campus on May 2, no one from SU made any form of outreach, safety checks or “in any way made safety related resources available to the plaintiff” on the day of her return or thereafter, despite Wildhack and Nugnet’s reassurance, the lawsuit alleges.

“At no time following the Scanlan Assault, including upon Plaintiff’s return to SU, did Plaintiff observe SU DPS perform a safety check on Plaintiff’s status,” the lawsuit claimed. According to the suit, the only support the plaintiff received were text messages from teammates and an assistant coach.

Scanlan was arrested outside of Manley Fieldhouse on May 7 and charged with criminal mischief related to a domestic incident, including a misdemeanor criminal mischief in the fourth degree.

One month after Scanlan’s arrest, Syracuse Athletics announced Desko’s retirement after 23 years as head coach of SU men’s lacrosse — SU women’s lacrosse head coach Gary Gait was named his successor.

On June 8, SU Athletics hosted a press conference for Desko’s retirement in which Wildhack praised Desko for his reputation and success as a collegiate athlete and head coach for SU lacrosse.

After the spring semester, the plaintiff met with SU women’s lacrosse’s interim coach about entering the transfer portal, where she learned if she entered the portal, her scholarship was not guaranteed for the following academic year should she return to SU.

In a call with Deputy Athletics Director Keenan-Kirkpatrick regarding the plaintiff’s transfer portal application, Keenan-Kirkpatrick informed the plaintiff that the policy to rescind scholarship money was usually applied to students who enter the portal and “leave SU in a ‘nasty way’ or ‘burning bridges’ with the school.”

Earlier in the spring semester, on April 6, the plaintiff’s acquaintances reported Scanlan’s abusive behavior — entering the plaintiff’s apartment without permission, physical abuse and animal abuse — to Keenan-Kirkpatrick. Months later during SU’s Title IX investigation, Keenan-Kirkpatrick said “there’s nothing you can do when the young lady won’t be forthcoming” when speaking about the information disclosed before the assault on April 18, the suit said.

In an external investigation into the accusations of bullying and harassment by former women’s basketball head coach Quentin Hillsman, The Athletic reported that Keenan-Kirkpatrick and other members of SU Athletics fielded complaints about Hillsman from students for over 10 years.

As of Aug. 4, Keenan-Kirkpatrick has not been employed at Syracuse.

The lawsuit, involving the university, Wildhack and Desko, claims that DPS and SU’s Title IX Office “failed to adequately respond to the domestic violence and stalking that Plaintiff suffered.” It also alleges that SU failed to properly maintain recorded and share information between SU’s Title IX Office, SU Athletics and DPS regarding Scanlan’s pattern of documented treatment of the plaintiff, the suit states.

“Plaintiff was made to suffer through an environment where her sexual harassment was deprioritized and minimized,” the lawsuit claims.

The plaintiff is pressing one count of sex discrimination in violation of Title IX against SU on the basis of deliberate indifference to the plaintiff’s January 2021 reports of sexual harassment.

“Plaintiff sustained harassment because of her sex that was so severe, pervasive and/or objectively offensive that it deprived her of access to educational opportunities,” the lawsuit claimed.

Count two entailed sex discrimination in violation of Title IX against SU on the basis of deliberate indifference to the assault and sexual harassment.

Count three detailed sex discrimination in violation of Title IX against SU by creating a hostile environment.

“As a direct and proximate result of the SU creation of and deliberate indifference to its sexually hostile educational environment, Plaintiff suffered damages and injuries for which SU is liable,” the suit reads.

Count four comprises retaliation in violation of Title IX against Syracuse University.

“As a result of Defendant SU’s adverse actions, Plaintiff has suffered damages,” the lawsuit said.

Finally, the fifth through seventh counts are differing allegations of negligence against SU, Wildhack and Desko.

SU stated that “this process is confidential to ensure and protect the privacy of all involved parties” and declined to comment. Desko and Wildhack could not be reached for comment.

CLARIFICATION: A previous version of this post did not make clear that it is the federal Title IX procedures that require all parties to see and hear each other in real time during the proceeding.

Published on September 2, 2021 at 2:35 am

Contact Skyler: skrivera@syr.edu | @skylerriveraa