By Brendan Pierson
(Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court on Wednesday delivered a groundbreaking ruling, allowing a former Yale University student to proceed with a defamation lawsuit against a fellow student who accused him of rape.
The momentous decision was made by a united, three-judge panel of the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, following a prior ruling by Connecticut’s highest court which found that the statements made by the accuser during a university disciplinary hearing were not protected by the legal immunity typically granted to court proceedings.
It is important to note that the lawsuit encompasses claims against Yale University, although these claims were not addressed in the recent ruling.
Plaintiff Saifullah Khan’s lawyer, Norman Pattis, expressed his satisfaction with the ruling and stated, “We’re delighted by the ruling and looking forward to holding Yale accountable for the harm it did to this extraordinary young man,” in an email.
No immediate comment was received from the defendant, referred to as Jane Doe, or her legal representation.
In his 2019 lawsuit filed in a Connecticut federal court, Doe alleged that Khan had raped her in 2015 following a Halloween party. Khan vehemently denies these allegations.
Khan was acquitted of criminal charges in 2018 after a trial, during which he was indefinitely suspended from Yale. Subsequent to the trial, Yale conducted a disciplinary hearing, which ultimately resulted in Khan’s expulsion upon being found responsible for the rape.
In 2019, Khan initiated a lawsuit against both Yale and Doe, asserting various claims including breach of contract and intentional infliction of emotional distress against the university, and defamation against Doe. The lawsuit sought a staggering $110 million in damages.
A judge dismissed Khan’s lawsuit against Doe, ruling that the university’s disciplinary hearing constituted a “quasi-judicial proceeding,” thereby granting Doe immunity against Khan’s defamation claims.
Unsatisfied with the ruling, Khan appealed, arguing that the hearing did not qualify as a quasi-judicial proceeding due to the lack of procedures safeguarding his due process rights, such as the opportunity to cross-examine Doe and call witnesses. According to court documents, Doe provided a statement via video, without Khan or his attorney present.
It is worth mentioning that at the time, U.S. Department of Education guidelines, enacted during former President Barack Obama’s administration, stated that cross-examination was not mandatory in such hearings, with many universities adopting a similar stance to Yale’s.
In 2020, the Trump administration introduced new regulations that mandated cross-examination, but this policy was subsequently blocked by a court ruling. President Joe Biden’s Department of Education has not sought to enforce a cross-examination requirement.
(Reporting by Brendan Pierson in New York, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Will Dunham)
