Citation network
Davis Vs. Monroe County Bd. of Ed.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 12, 1999
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Davis v. MonroeSearch
-
County Bd. of ED. - 526 U.S. 629 (1999) October Term, 1998 Syllabus Davis, as Next Friend of Lashonda D. V. MonroeSearch
-
the school. Pp. 638-653. (a) An implied private right of action for money damages exists under Title IX, Franklin v. GwinnettSearch
-
recipients had adequate notice that they could be liable for the conduct at issue, Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. HaldermanSearch
-
to remain idle in the face of known student-on-student harassment in its schools. The standard set out in Gebser v. LagoSearch
-
are effectively denied equal access to an institution's resources and opportunities. Cf. Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSearch
-
conduct is harassment depends on a constellation of surrounding circumstances, expectations, and relationships, Oncale v. SundownerSearch
-
onstudent sexual harassment, compare 120 F.3d 1390 (CAll 638 1998) (case below), and Rowinsky v. BryanSearch
-
responds to these claims differently based on gender of victim), cert. denied, 519 U. S. 861 (1996), with Doe v. UniversitySearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
s inadequate response to known student-on-student harassment), vacated and remanded, post, p. 1142, Brzonkala v. VirginiaSearch
-
District Court to hold this claim in abeyance pending this Court's decision in the instant case), and Oona, R.-S.- v. McCaffreySearch
-
Cannon v. UniversitySearch
-
to respond to studenton-student harassment in its schools can support a private suit for money damages. See Gebser v. LagoSearch
-
This Court has indeed recognized an implied private right of action under Title IX, see Cannon v. UniversitySearch
-
Title IX as legislation enacted pursuant to Congress' authority under the Spending Clause, however, see, e. g., Gebser v. LagoSearch
-
Franklin v. GwinnettSearch
-
see also Guardians Assn. v. CivilSearch
-
Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. HaldermanSearch
-
funding recipient for the misconduct of third parties, over whom recipients exercise little control. See also Rowinsky v. BryanSearch
-
damages liability under Title IX to parties outside the scope of this power. See National Collegiate Athletic Assn. v. SmithSearch
-
cf. Gebser v. LagoSearch
-
before subjecting it to damages liability. 524 U. S., at 287 (quoting Franklin v. GwinnettSearch
-
Gebser v. LagoSearch
-
see Gebser V. LagoSearch
-
Vista Independent School Dist., supra, at 290-291 (citing Board of Comm'rs of Bryan Cty. V. BrownSearch
-
U. S. 397 (1997), and Canton V. HarrisSearch
-
see also Canton v. HarrisSearch
-
to permit teacher-student harassment in its schools, Franklin v. GwinnettSearch
-
cf. Faragher v. BocaSearch
-
Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSearch
-
that schools have been negligent in failing to protect their students from the torts of their peers. See, e. g., Rupp v. BryantSearch
-
Brahatcek v. MillardSearch
-
McLeod v. GrantSearch
-
of the funding recipient. See Doe v. UniversitySearch
-
Vernonia School Dist. J,7J v. ActonSearch
-
Tinker v. DesSearch
-
clarity to satisfy Pennhurst's notice requirement and serve as a basis for a damages action. See Gebser v. LagoSearch
-
if sufficiently severe, can likewise rise to the level of discrimination actionable under the statute. See Bennett v. KentuckySearch
-
Oncale v. SundownerSearch
-
U. S. 41, 45-46 (1957). See also Scheuer v. RhodesSearch
-
U. S. 203 , 207 (1987) (quoting United States v. ButlerSearch
-
which money damages are available. The only private cause of action under Title IX is judicially implied. See Cannon v. UniversitySearch
-
We try to conform the judicial judgment to the bounds of likely congressional purpose but, as we observed in Gebser v. LagoSearch
-
Syllabus Davis, as Next Friend of Lashonda D. V. MonroeSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial