Hazing Cases and Qualified Immunity

1737 Words7 Pages
Introduction: In recent years several high profile national cases have brought hazing to the forefront in American society as a real issue and a problematic one at that. According to recent statistics from the University of Maine, 1.5 million high school students are hazed each year. Of the athletes who have reported hazing, 40% have reported that a coach or advisor was aware of the activity. 22% report that the coach was actually involved in the activities. (Allan & Madden, 2008). Moreover, 36% of students say they would not report hazing primarily because “there’s no one to tell,” and 27% feel that officials or coaches won’t handle the situation right. In additional research a survey was conducted in which coaches were questioned…show more content…
Several of Seamons’ teammates assaulted him in the locker-room by dragging him out the shower, taping him to a towel-rack, and inviting his ex-girlfriend into the locker-room to view him while naked in this state. Seamons and his parents reported the incident to the local police and school authorities, which included Myron Benson, the principle and Doug Snow, the football coach and defendant. Several days later Seamons and his parents met with Principle Benson and Coach Snow to discuss whether the Seamons would press any charges and if he still wanted to play on the team. Seamons indicated that he in fact did want to stay on the team but after a meeting with Coach Snow and captains of the team, which included several of the assailants and they wanted him to apologize for reporting the incident to remain on the team. Seamons refused to apologize and subsequently was removed from the team by Coach Snow. The plaintiff, Brian Seamons and his family brought suit against the defendant Coach Snow claiming violations of his rights under Title IX and violations of his constitutional rights to procedural due process, substantive due process, freedom from association, freedom of speech, and equal protection. The district court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss all of Seamons claims. Seamons appealed to the court and the court affirmed the dismissal of all claims except his free speech claim. The defendants then moved for summary judgment and during that hearing

More about Hazing Cases and Qualified Immunity

Open Document