Montgomery v. Independent Sch. Dist. No. 709
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota
109 F. Supp. 2d 1081 (2000)
- Written by Haley Gintis, JD
Facts
Jesse Montgomery (plaintiff) attended multiple schools from kindergarten until tenth grade within Independent School District Number 709 (the school district) (defendant). While attending school, Montgomery was subjected to verbal and physical assaults. Male students called Montgomery names that were derogatory toward females and gay individuals, physically attacked him, and grabbed his genitalia in violent and sexual manners. The harassment began when Montgomery was in kindergarten and lasted until his parents transferred him to another school district. Montgomery and his parents consistently reported the harassment, but they were unsatisfied with the school district’s responses. School officials rarely punished the students who engaged in the inappropriate conduct. After enduring 11 years of harassment, Montgomery sued the school district in federal district court under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. Montgomery claimed that the school district had violated Title IX by failing to prevent the harassment. The school district filed a motion to dismiss. The school district argued that Title IX required it to prevent harassment or discrimination based on sex and that the harassment Montgomery had been subjected to was based on his sexual orientation rather than his sex. The district court considered the motion.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Tunheim, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.