A federal judge has dismissed certain portions of the hazing lawsuit filed by a former University of Virginia freshman against five then-upperclassmen on the team.
Former Virginia swimmer Anthony Marcantonio is suing five former Virginia swimmers who were upperclassmen when Marcantonio claims he was hazed as a freshman on the team. Defendants Kyle Dudzinski, Luke Papendick, Charlie Rommel, David Ingraham and Jacob Pearce filed a response to the suit in September, asking that the case be dismissed from federal court on the grounds that Marcantonio hadn’t provided enough evidence to support his allegations.
Federal Judge Norman K. Moon heard the arguments at the end of November, and responded this week by dismissing some portions of the ten-count lawsuit filed by Marcantonio, according to Virginia’s The Daily Progress.
Notably, Moon dismissed all by two counts against Papendick, because Marcantonio’s suit never specifically claims that Papendick was present at the swimming house the night the alleged hazing occurred. Papendick could still be charged as a co-conspirator in the dismissed charges, and the common law conspiracy charge and the punitive damages charges still stand.
Moon did not dismiss most of the major charges, though, including assault, battery, false imprisonment, hazing and negligence.
The Daily Progess‘s report does mention a group of e-mails sent to Marcantonio from a made-up moniker of “Mr. Mean.” Judge Moon notes that the e-mails were “crass” and contained “unique threats,” and that the alleged behavior of the defendants at the swimming house could link them collectively to the e-mail account.
Moon also shot down the portion of Marcantonio’s suit that alleged that the defendants interfered with his “contractual relations” with the University. Marcantonio’s camp tried to frame his position on the Virginia Swimming & Diving team as a contract between himself and the University, but Judge Moon wrote that Marcantonio’s suit failed to specific the length and terms of the contract.
You can read the full examination of the dismissal on the Daily Progress website here.
Getting anything dismissed at this early stage of litigation in Virginia is vert difficult to do, so wouldn’t read too much into failure to dismiss other charges – it just means the plaintiff made allegations, that if proved in court, would sustain the claim. The real meat of the matter comes when its time to establish facts in court. But this will likely never get that far as there is likely insurance coverage involved and at some point the insurers will settle to end legal expenses.
Rulings on motions to dismiss are hardly ever made “with prejudice,” that is to say, with finality. Normally the plaintiff can amend his original complaint to meet the judge’s objections if, in fact,he can do so in good faith.
It would be unusual for attorney fees to simply be awarded to a defendant because a case is dismissed. One of the unfortunate consequences of the Ligitgation Inc. economy that has made its way into the taxpayer courts is just that; anyone can take a dispute to rhe courts and in doing so it puts a burden both financial and emotional onto a defendant. That isn’t me mocking plaintiffs in civil disputes, just a reality. The old joke is only two types of citizens belong in court: indigent criminals or the criminally wealthy.
You are right that in most instances a defendant is most grateful to just prevail and move on. Litigation is an expensive and emotionally ravaging affair… Read more »
Joel Lin, you were absolutely 100% correct is stating that the plaintiff had ZERO claims against the school. Nice going.
Do you think that the judge will dismiss more claims as the discovery process continues to unfold?
Three of the claims were dismissed; however, I am a bit surprised that more of the claims were not dismissed. I believe the attorneys for the defendants just made a shoddy argument here. The best defense is this: the claims that are alive are quite literally accuses of crimes. The futility of this lawsuit is on one prong, the University didn’t sanction any of the five with a suspension or other University sanction. The athletic department went as far as a suspension period from competing, but not an expulsion from University sports. Like all other complaints criminal in nature, these accuses were referred to the police and the state’s attorney. Neither pursued any claims or swore out charges. This lawsuit… Read more »
I hear ya on this case masquerading as a criminal case, but that happens all of the time, especially when defendants are found not guilty, so the aggrieved party sues in civil court. When the justice system doesn’t give someone the pound of flesh they think they deserve, the aggrieved person sues for money.
Joel, you’re obviously an attorney, so you know that due process is an elusive process. Most judges should dismiss many cases with prejudice but they don’t. The system can be a roll of the dice; sometimes one wins, sometimes one loses.
I am not sure that the defendants will want to sue in civil court because the standard of proof is much lower than… Read more »
Wow, looks like this suit is going forward and these boys will have to face this in court.