More on the lawsuit against the University of Miami, Colin McGinn, and Edward Erwin

I've now had a chance to read the entire complaint.  I won't have much to say about the University, except to note what is already clear from the news reports, namely, that its position will be that it, in fact, secured the resignation of McGinn and so complied with its Title IX obligations.  I am sure the University will move to dismiss, and I would not be surprised if it were successful.  The University is also named in some of the tortious wrongdoing claims against McGinn and/or Erwin, though I suspect as against the University, many of these claims are also likely to be dismissed, but some of this will turn on elements of Florida law about which I know little or nothing.

McGinn is being sued for civil battery and assault (for the unwanted touching/fondling--or expression of a desire to touch/fondle--of hands and feet), intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, invasion of privacy, and civil conspiracy; Erwin is being sued for the last three as well.  The strongest claim is the defamation claim, it seems to me, and the biggest obstacle to the plaintiff's prevailing is the one that faced Ludlow when he sued newspapers for falsely reporting that he had been accused or rape:  namely, that the plaintiff was not explicitly named by the defendants, except in letters McGinn sent to other philosophers and academics early on, but since that constitutes publication to third parties, it will suffice for defamation (though the limited exposure will likely affect the damage claims).

One question that will arise if the lawsuit survives the motions to dismiss is whether or not describing what transpired as failure to report a "consensual" romantic relationship, as the University did, was accurate or not.  Given the facts alleged by the plaintiff, that does seem rather incredible as a characterization.   It seems only if McGinn's e-mails were reciprocated in kind by plaintiff (as he and Erwin appear to have alleged at various points) might such a characterization be credible, but if such evidence existed, then this legal strategy on the part of the plaintiff would be both misguided and dangerous, so my surmise is it does not.  And if it does not, then the defamation claims against the individual defendants and perhaps also the Title IX claims against Miami will be strengthened.