This story was originally published by Daily Montanan:
URL: https://dailymontanan.com
This story has not been altered or edited.
(C) Daily Montanan. Licensed for re-distribution through Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.
------------



Judge hears arguments on class certification for Title IX lawsuit – Daily Montanan

['Nicole Girten', 'More From Author', '- June']

Date: 2022-06-13 00:00:00

Attorneys will have until July 30 to compile a list of potential plaintiffs for a possible class-action suit against the University of Montana and the state’s university system as a whole after a federal judge heard arguments Monday in the gender discrimination case.

Chief Judge Brian Morris in Great Falls heard arguments centering on whether a case that alleges in part a “good ol’ boys” mentality at UM should be a class-action lawsuit, as plaintiffs argued.

Weighing a suggestion from plaintiff’s counsel, Morris gave attorneys until the end of July to come up with a list of current or former employees who may have a discrimination claim before deciding whether to certify the lawsuit as a class action, or to let cases proceed individually, for which the university has argued.

In addition to the four plaintiffs — one current faculty member and three former high-ranking employees — plaintiff’s attorney Hillary Carls said there could be as many as 76 people with similar claims.

Carls argued that a “culture of discrimination” at UM connected each of the 76 individuals and justified a class certification.

However, Susan Moriarity Miltko, an attorney representing UM and the Montana University System, said that a culture isn’t specific enough to establish commonality in each of the cases, as is needed to certify a class-action suit.

The university system also argued that because 72 of the possible plaintiffs haven’t even been identified, the university system can’t evaluate the claims and whether there is a common thread linking them.

Furthermore, she argued that Carls and her clients had failed to meet any of the prerequisites in federal law for a case to be certified as a class action.

In August, the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit alleging a hostile educational environment and retaliatory culture against women contrary to Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination based on sex. The women alleged UM President Seth Bodnar, who took the helm at UM in 2018, allowed a “retaliatory culture” against females, among other claims; the lawsuit does not name the president as a defendant, it names only “John Doe defendants 1-50.”

During the hearing Monday, lawyers referenced another case, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. vs. Dukes, in which 1.5 million female employees across 3,000 stores sued the big-box retailer, alleging sex discrimination in pay and promotions.

The United States Supreme Court held the suit didn’t rise to a class-action level because it lacked any particular common practice or policy.

However, Carls argued the Wal-Mart case was not directly comparable because the UM case involved significantly fewer potential claimants.

UM spokesperson Dave Kuntz said Monday that the university presented evidence to the court showing the accusations are not based in fact.

“Regarding today’s arguments, we strongly believe these false and inflammatory allegations fail to meet the requisite requirements necessary to secure class status,” Kuntz said in an emailed statement Monday.

Carls said after the hearing that she hoped to advocate for as many women as possible.

[END]

[1] Url: https://dailymontanan.com/2022/06/13/judge-hears-arguments-on-class-certification-for-title-ix-lawsuit/

Content is licensed through Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/montanan/