Gomes v. University of Maine System
United States District Court for the District of Maine
365 F. Supp. 2d 6 (2005)
Facts
A female student (the complainant) filed a police report with the Old Town Police Department alleging that Gomes and Minor (plaintiffs), two male students at the University of Maine (defendant), had sexually assaulted her. She also filed a university incident report, which initiated proceedings under the university’s Student Conduct Code. Pursuant to the Student Conduct Code, a university official, designated as the “officer,” investigated the incident and referred the case to the hearing committee. The hearing committee held a hearing and allowed both the officer, who served as the “prosecutor” of the case, and Gomes and Minor, who were both represented by counsel, to examine and cross-examine witnesses. The hearing committee concluded that Gomes and Minor had violated the Student Conduct Code and suspended each for one year. Gomes and Minor appealed to the appeal committee, which affirmed the hearing committee’s decision. Gomes and Minor then appealed to the university president’s designee, who also affirmed the decision. Gomes and Minor then filed a lawsuit against the university, arguing that their due-process rights had been violated because they were not provided with the complainant’s statement to the Old Town Police Department, which contained her own conflicting statements and inaccuracies, even though it was provided to the university’s officer by the district attorney prior to the hearing.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Woodcock, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 709,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.