# Doe v. Board of Supervisors of the University of Louisiana System

> District Court, M.D. Louisiana · November 17, 2022

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10192449

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, M.D. Louisiana
- **Decided:** November 17, 2022
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10192449

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

JANE DOE CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA
SYSTEM, ET AL. NO. 22-00338-BAJ-SDJ

ORDER
Plaintiff was the victim of sexual assault when she was a student at Louisiana
Tech University. In this action, Plaintiff alleges institutional neglect and nonfeasance
against Defendants Board of Supervisors of the University of Louisiana System (“UL
System”), Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State University and Agricultural and
Mechanical College (“LSU”), and Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government
(“City of Lafayette”), asserting that for several years these public entities knew the
identity of her assailant—a Louisiana Tech student who had been previously banned
from LSU’s Baton Rouge campus after two female LSU students separately reported
him for sexual assault—because he was a sexual predator that had been accused of
rape and other sexual misconduct on five prior occasions, yet failed to take
appropriate action to bring him to justice. (See Doc. 1 at ¶¶ 3-4).
Against LSU, Plaintiff alleges state-law negligence claims only. (Doc. 1 at ¶¶
156-161). Now, LSU moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims, solely on the basis that “LSU
is immune from Plaintiff’s suit in this Court” under the Eleventh Amendment. (Doc.
23-1 at p. 4). Plaintiff objects. (Doc. 31). While tacitly acknowledging that LSU
generally enjoys sovereign immunity from state law claims in federal court, Plaintiff
states that she “pursued her state-law claim against Defendant LSU in federal court
in the spirit of judicial economy,” and reminds LSU that “sovereign immunity is a
personal privilege which it may waive at pleasure,” Coll. Sav. Bank v. Fla. Prepaid

Postsecondary Educ. Expense Bd., 527 U.S. 666, 675 (1999). (Doc. 31 at pp. 1-2).
LSU has not filed a reply to Plaintiff’s objection, or otherwise responded to
Plaintiff’s invitation to waive sovereign immunity for purposes of this action. Plainly,
judicial economy favors a single proceeding, which would streamline discovery,
reduce litigation costs, conserve judicial resources, and avoid contradictory outcomes.
LSU’s silence suggests that it (inexplicably) prefers parallel litigation and duplicative
efforts. Under the circumstances of this case, however, and because Plaintiff has

expressly raised the issue of waiver, the Court will require LSU to expressly respond.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that on or before November 29, 2022 Defendant Board of
Supervisors of Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College
shall file a notice into the record stating whether or not it will waive sovereign
immunity for purposes of this action.

Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 17th day of November, 2022

_____________________________________
JUDGE BRIAN A. JACKSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10192449. Public record. Not legal advice.