Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Frazer v. Temple Univ.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

June 5, 2014

EMILY FRAZER, Plaintiff
v.
TEMPLE UNIVERSITY, et al., Defendants

Page 599

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 600

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 601

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 602

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 603

For EMILY FRAZER, Plaintiff: JASON P. KUTULAKIS, LEAD ATTORNEY, ABOM & KUTULAKIS, CARLISLE, PA.

For TEMPLE UNIVERSITY, Defendant: KAREN P. GASTER, PAUL J. SOPHER, LEAD ATTORNEYS, RUBIN FORTUNATO & HARBISON, P.C., PAOLI, PA; MARIA V. MARTIN, LEAD ATTORNEY, RUBIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C., PAOLI, PA.

ANDREW CERETT, Defendant, Pro se, FREDERICKTOWN, PA.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Page 604

NITZA I. QUIÑ ONES ALEJANDRO, J.

INTRODUCTION

Before this Court is a motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Temple University (" Defendant" or " Temple" ), pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (Rule) 12(b)(6), which seeks the dismissal of all federal and state claims asserted against it. [ECF 1-21]. Emily Frazer (" Plaintiff" or " Frazer" ) opposes the motion [ECF 1-27], making the motion to dismiss ripe for disposition.[1]

For the reasons stated herein, the motion to dismiss is granted.

BACKGROUND

On January 11, 2013, Plaintiff filed a civil rights action asserting various federal and state law claims against Temple, Andrew Cerett (" Cerett" ), and Allied Barton Security Services, LLC (" Allied Barton" ). The federal causes of action asserted against Temple are: civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (" § 1983" ) for violating Plaintiff's substantive due process and equal protection rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment; illegal seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment; creating a hostile educational environment and retaliation in violation of Title IX, 20 U.S.C. § 1681; and violation of 20 U.S.C. § 1092(f) (the " Clery Act" ).[2] The state law causes of action asserted against Temple are: negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violations of the Pennsylvania constitution. [ECF 1-1].

Defendant filed the instant motion to dismiss on March 22, 2013.[3] When ruling on this motion, this Court must accept, as true, the relevant allegations in Plaintiff's complaint, to wit:

Frazer is an adult female, and has been a full-time student at Temple since January 2010, (Comp. ¶ ¶ 6-7), and initially attended Temple on a full athletic scholarship to play volleyball. ( Id. at ¶ 30).
Defendant Cerett is an adult male, who was a full-time student at Temple from May 2010 until May 2011. ( Id. at ¶ 16). Cerett was also a student athlete with a full scholarship as a punter for the Temple football team during that same time period. ( Id. at ¶ ¶ 17-18). When Plaintiff filed her complaint, Cerett was ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.