Lacrosse captain sues Rice, seeks to graduate
Amanda Cahn, a captain of the women’s club lacrosse team, has filed a lawsuit against Rice, alleging breach of contract and sexual discrimination and asking for an injunction that would allow her to graduate in May.
Cahn, who was a Sid Richardson College senior in the fall, was suspended along with the other women’s lacrosse team captain and the three men’s team captains for hazing and violating the Alcohol Policy at an off-campus initiation party Dec. 3.
Cahn hired a lawyer, Eliot Tucker, March 18 and filed the complaint against Rice March 22. The trial began Monday with testimony from 11 students and continued Tuesday, when President David Leebron was called as a witness. The court was in recess Wednesday and reconvened yesterday. Tucker said he expects to conclude his case Friday and expects Judge Lee Rosenthal to make a ruling before Commencement May 14.
At the party, about 20 new members of the men’s and women’s teams were handcuffed in pairs using metal novelty handcuffs, and each pair was given a fifth of a gallon of hard liquor to drink. Two of the new members of the men’s team and two of the new members of the women’s team were hospitalized for alcohol-related illnesses the night of the party, according to Assistant Dean of Student Judicial Programs Don Ostdiek’s investigation.
Ostdiek decided to disband the men’s and women’s teams for three semesters. He also suspended Cahn and the other women’s captain, Laura Barnes, who was a Brown College junior, as well as two of the men’s team captains — Rob Gillette, who was a Martel College senior, and Chris Sramek, who was a Will Rice College senior — for three semesters. Ostdiek suspended the other men’s captain, Sam Symonds, who was a Hanszen College junior, for two semesters. On appeal, President David Leebron reduced each captain’s suspension by one semester March 3. Cahn completed her graduation requirements in the fall and will be able to graduate upon being readmitted in January 2006.
Barnes, Cahn, Leebron and Ostdiek declined to comment on the case.
The complaint
Cahn’s suit alleges that Rice violated contractual obligations outlined in both the General Announcements and the Code of Student Conduct. The complaint states that the university violated its understood agreement with Cahn by refusing to award her a diploma even though she completed the required course work and paid tuition for four years.
‘[Cahn’s] job opportunities will be severely and immediately limited and her career and work life irreparably injured should [she] not be awarded the diploma that she has rightfully earned from Rice,’ the document states.
The complaint asserts that Ostdiek violated the procedures outlined in the code and that he was unfair in his investigation and adjudication of the case.
‘Ostdiek’s investigation was not … a neutral investigation of the facts. … Moreover, [Cahn] was not afforded a hearing, or any other right to dispute, challenge or even review the evidence relied upon by Ostdiek in his investigation, as required by the Code,’ the complaint states.
Finally, the complaint claims that the judicial proceedings were biased against the female captains because of their gender.
‘Rice’s suspension of [Cahn] and its refusal to allow [her] to graduate is intentionally discriminatory against [her] on the basis of her sex,’ the complaint states.
The claim also states that Rice has set a precedent of ignoring Alcohol Policy violations and hazing committed by male students. The suit alleges that Cahn’s punishment was based on gender and therefore violated Title IX.
‘One male team captain was given a lesser punishment than [Cahn], despite having engaged in more egregious conduct,’ the complaint states. ‘[Cahn] was given equal punishment as [the] male team captains for unequal conduct as found by Rice’s own investigation. [Cahn] and the other female team captain involved in the party were undeniably held to a higher standard than the males.’
The opening statements
The trial began Monday with opening statements by Tucker and Rice’s trial lawyer, Rusty Hardin.
In his statement, Tucker called Cahn’s punishment excessive.
‘When the evidence is all in … you’ll see that what happened to Amanda Cahn was neither fair nor reasonable,’ he said.
Tucker acknowledged that Cahn violated the Alcohol Policy but denied that the events of the party constituted hazing.
‘There is no evidence of hazing, no evidence of intentional or reckless causing of mental or bodily harm,’ Tucker said.
Tucker said Cahn and the other captains put no pressure on team members to drink excessively. ‘The rookies were told in writing and told orally that they did not have to participate — they did not have to drink. … They acted individually and on their own,’ he said.
Tucker challenged Ostdiek’s qualifications and handling of the case. He said Ostdiek previously failed to investigate Alcohol Policy violations at the Night of Decadence, as well as possible hazing at Jones College’s ‘freshman sacrifice,’ in which freshmen are tied to columns outside the college to witness Baker 13.
Tucker also said Ostdiek made serious mistakes — most importantly, reporting that the men’s captains proposed having the pairs drink beer and the women’s captains argued for using hard liquor when, in fact, the women’s captains proposed beer.
Finally, Tucker asserted that dangerous binge drinking is common among Rice students.
‘You’ll see that Rice itself is extreme among American universities in permitting the sort of drinking that occurred on this campus and the delivery of kegs and so forth,’ Tucker said.
In Hardin’s opening statement, he called Cahn’s sexual discrimination claim frivolous.
‘The Title IX claim — a suggestion by [Cahn] that somehow she has been treated differently because of her gender — is a recently-developed theory that Rice never even heard of until the lawsuit was filed,’ Hardin said.
Hardin noted that two of the men’s captains received the same penalty as Cahn.
‘What [Cahn] is basically saying is that she should have been treated differently than the males in this case, and the fact that she was treated the same as the males somehow rises to the level of discrimination in violation of Title IX,’ Hardin said.
Hardin also read from the General Announcements and Code of Student Conduct, both of which state that the procedures they outline do not constitute a contract.
‘Rice University judicial bodies are not designed to and should not be expected to function as courts of law,’ Hardin read from the code.
Hardin said the lacrosse captains purposely circumvented the Alcohol Policy by failing to register their party and by serving alcohol to minors. He also said Barnes and Cahn were not forthcoming with information during Ostdiek’s investigation.
The testimony
Eleven students testified Monday, eight of whom were members of the lacrosse teams. Team members testified that the handcuffing and drinking at the lacrosse party were consensual. Many also testified that Ostdiek’s investigation of the case was biased and that he intimidated them and used leading questions when interviewing them.
Students also testified they had witnessed public and private parties at Rice similar to the Dec. 3 party.
The team members who testified were Barnes, Martel freshman Gillian Alex, Lovett College junior Peter Darrell, Martel sophomore Emma Johns, Wiess College freshman Michelle Kerner, Baker College sophomore Liz Kim, Lovett sophomore Andrea Koploy and Martel sophomore Erin Sozanski. The students not on the team who testified were Brown senior Emily Newport, Jones junior Ashley Pfefferkorn and Jones sophomore Kendall Spence.
Leebron testified in the case Tuesday. He said there was no sexual discrimination in the judicial process.
‘It would be inconsistent with everything I believe in,’ Leebron said.
Hardin asked Leebron if he had seen an e-mail, introduced as evidence, that Cahn sent to Gillette Nov. 25, in which she discussed plans for the party.
‘We will handcuff [women’s team members] to rookie boys and get them more drunk than they’ve been in a long time,’ the e-mail states. ‘The boys didn’t like the 40 idea, said it wouldn’t get their boys drunk. So we’re back to a fifth of alcohol between the two. Plus, I think a couple of us should walk around with [other alcohol] and make them take random shots.’
Leebron said he had not seen the e-mail previously, but that it did not change his opinion of the case. He said he thinks no punishment less than suspension would be appropriate.
‘I think students on their appeal basically asked that there be no suspension whatsoever and that the sanctions not interfere with their plans in any way whatsoever,’ Leebron said. ‘I consider this a quite, quite serious event, not an event like any that people had previously seen at Rice. Four kids went to the hospital.’
Leebron said he reduced the suspensions partly because the captains had no prior disciplinary infractions. Also, he said, a three-semester suspension might effectively become a four-semester suspension because students would have to wait until the end of the second academic year before pursuing plans such as graduate school.
Leebron said he acknowledges that underage drinking happens at Rice.
‘We don’t police our students,’ Leebron said. ‘They’re free in a lot of ways. And I assume in a population of 2,800 students, there is underage drinking going on.’
Rosenthal interrupted to point out that in the students’ testimony Monday, many portrayed Rice as a community that accepts and encourages binge drinking.
‘The Court heard testimony of a culture that virtually celebrates intoxication … as not only [an] accepted but [an] encouraged way to mark a number of occasions, to the extent of … students encouraging each other to drink in classes, to play games that revolve around drinking, [and] to mark a number of campus events … with severe degrees of widespread intoxication,’ Rosenthal said.
Leebron said the alcohol was only one element of the lacrosse situation.
‘If this was just about the alcohol … that would be a different case,’ Leebron said. ‘This was a case about hazing that [was] for purposes of affiliation [with] this group. And it may be that the handcuffs were removable. But putting people together with handcuffs and giving them a fifth of alcohol to drink has a certain powerful suggesting context.’
Because time ran out, Tucker could not cross-examine Leebron Tuesday. Leebron was scheduled to continue testifying yesterday.
The lawyers
Hardin said the most striking aspect of the first two days of testimony was Tucker’s portrayal of Rice as having a rampant underage drinking problem. Tucker submitted disciplinary records and Rice Emergency Medical Services reports as evidence in the case.
‘So far it has been a trial trashing Rice about its students’ drinking,’ Hardin said. ‘They contend that it was no big deal for students to go to the hospital — that they go all the time.’
Despite the testimony, Tucker said he recognizes that Rice is not a party school.
‘There are some schools known as party schools, but Rice isn’t one of them,’ Tucker said. ‘Rice is a serious institution full of serious students.’
Tucker said Ostdiek bears primary responsibility for Cahn’s wrongful punishment.
‘From what I have seen, from what I have read and from my taking of Assistant Dean Ostdiek’s deposition, he did not look at each student’s individual participation in this matter,’ Tucker said. ‘He lumped everything together, he was not careful in his questioning, and he did not learn a number of significant things.’
Hardin said neither Ostdiek nor Leebron ever discriminated against the women’s captains on the basis of gender. Hardin said the charge of sexual discrimination was based on the men’s captains not being punished more severely than the women’s.
Hardin said Cahn’s most reprehensible action was her role in planning the party, which is demonstrated by the e-mails in evidence.
‘Five captains planned this and organized it,’ Hardin said. ‘This was an organized, planned affair to have underage students get drunk.’
Hardin said hazing could have occurred even though the captains told team members the handcuffing and drinking were optional.
‘There’s no question these kids were able to stop if they wanted,’ Hardin said. ‘It’s the insidious pressure to drink fast and a lot as part of a game that gave the school so much concern.’
Hardin has represented Rice previously. In a 1993 case, he successfully defended the university against a student who filed a civil rights lawsuit after being arrested on campus. Hardin was district attorney for Houston for 16 years and served as chief trial counsel for the Whitewater Independent Counsel’s Office. He has represented Arthur Andersen and various professional athletes, including Wade Boggs, Warren Moon and Scottie Pippen.
Other news stories
- Chef Elkhouri wins cooking contest
- College lot parking fees increase by 117 percent
- NASA grant awarded for nanotube research
- Students enter One Lap of America race
- Subway to leave convenience store after six years in Student Center
Sports
- Hewamudalige wins 5,000-meter run
- Men's tennis loses in WAC final
- Owls follow sweep with comeback win over UH
- Participation to decide President's Cup winner
- Rice looks for at-large bid to NCAAs
- Six set personal bests
Arts & Entertainment
- Godard stumbles with pretentious, incoherent 'Musique'
- My movie theater blues hit record high
- Thrill gone from new Kidman-Penn drama