When faced with sympathetic parties or unusual facts, courts are sometimes inclined to move from a strict interpretation of the law in order to reach an equitable outcome.  There was the potential for such a ruling in Twersky, et. al. v. Yeshiva University, et. al., where there were allegations that school administrators covered up claims of sexual abuse.  However, instead the Second Circuit held that even where there are allegations of a cover-up of sexual abuse, the statute of limitations for such claims will not be tolled once the alleged victim reaches the age of majority.

More than 30 former students of Yeshiva University High School for Boys commenced a $680 million lawsuit against Yeshiva University claiming that the school covered up sexual abuse by rabbis that took place up until the early 1990s.

First, addressing Title IX claims (a federal statute that provides for private causes of action for sexual abuse and harassment against schools who receive federal funding), the Court ruled that because the plaintiffs graduated more than 20 years ago and knew at that time of the abuse and that the perpetrators were still employed by the school, they were at least placed on “inquiry notice as to the school’s awareness of and indifference to the abusive conduct by its teachers.” The Court rejected the plaintiffs’ contention that the statute of limitations did not begin until a December 2012 article revealed that Yeshiva knowingly hid the rabbis’ misconduct.  Rather, after reporting their abuse, plaintiffs should have realized that they had an action against the school when “administrators rebuffed their complaints or otherwise failed to take remedial action…”

The Court next held that the school was not equitably estopped from raising the statute of limitations as a defense against the New York common law claims. A defendant is equitably estopped when plaintiff can demonstrate that she failed to timely file a lawsuit because of her “reasonable reliance on deception, fraud or misrepresentations by the defendant.”  Victims of sexual abuse have until they reach the age of 18 to bring a claim.  The Court found that even if the school was required to disclose their purported knowledge of any abuse, the plaintiffs “failure to investigate or to institute suit for more than 20 years thereafter cannot support equitable estoppel.”

The Second Circuit agreed with the federal district court’s finding that the plaintiffs’ claims were time-barred under both Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and under New York State law.

The attorney for the plaintiffs has petitioned the Second Circuit for an en banc hearing before all of the judges sitting on the Second Circuit, and we will report on the outcome.

Thanks to Steve Kaye for his contribution to this post.  For more information, please write to Mike Bono.