WILLIAMSPORT – Penn State University has denied Title IX claims brought against it and a former women’s fencing coach, saying the plaintiff’s allegations of physical, psychological and verbal abuse were either time-barred or improperly pled.
Zara Moss of Pittsburgh first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania on Jan. 3 versus The Pennsylvania State University and Maestro Weislaw “Wes” Glon, of State College.
The suit explained that from a very early age, Moss dreamed of attending Penn State University and going on to fence at the highest level. That years-long quest began to take shape when Moss was accepted to Penn State on a full scholarship in 2016.
But beginning the following year, the suit said, things began to unravel for Moss.
“Wes tormented Zara from the start. He hounded her about her weight – something he never did to male fencers. By October 2017, Zara had developed an eating disorder. And Wes liked that. He praised Zara when she looked ‘skinny’ and disparaged her when she gained a pound. Zara lost 15 pounds in her first few months at Penn State. Almost daily, she sent her mom troubling text messages about her newfound disdain for her own body,” the suit said.
“Despite Zara’s strong performance, Wes took every opportunity to degrade and verbally abuse Zara. Cruelly, he told her she was a waste of his time and valuable scholarship money. He criticized everything she did and Zara was in constant fear that Wes would take away her scholarship. Consequently, Zara developed panic and anxiety symptoms requiring medication. She became a shell of herself and lived in fear of Wes.”
Over the following four years, the suit alleged, among others, that Wes engaged in the following behaviors:
• Forced Moss and other women fencers to compete while injured, and specifically when Moss had a concussion, falsely claiming she was “being overly emotional and sensitive because she was on her period”;
• Physically assaulted Moss by fencing her and preventing her from wearing protective equipment;
• Developed an obsession with Zara’s weight, which fueled Zara’s eating disorder and problematic relationship with food and her body;
• Hurled sex-based invective at Moss by claiming that “the reason she was not good anymore was because she needed a boyfriend”; and
• Covered up a sexual assault of another school’s women’s fencing coach, allegedly committed by his own assistant coach.
“On March 10, 2021, Zara scheduled a meeting with Bob Boland, Penn State’s Athletics Integrity Officer. On March 17, 2021, Zara met with Boland and reported Wes’s abuse. Specifically, she reported, among other things, Wes’s verbal abuse towards the women fencers and the danger Wes placed them in when he forced them to compete while injured,” the suit stated.
“When Zara mentioned Wes’s differential treatment of men and women, Boland responded that Penn State compliance had received numerous reports of sexism and abuse on the fencing team. Boland then made his priorities clear. He advised Zara to wait until after the after the NCAAs to schedule another meeting to discuss Wes’s conduct to avoid ‘rocking the boat’ before the national championship.”
Despite Moss reporting Wes’s misconduct, detailing the years of suffering she endured on the team and Boland commenting that Wes’s differential treatment of men and women fencers “could support a Title IX claim and warranted further investigation”, when Moss suggested that Wes be removed as head coach, Boland dismissively responded, “Well, it’s hard to find fencing coaches.”
According to Moss, the reports were never followed up with further action, and Wes remained in his role of head coach.
“Wes was an influential and powerful figure in the fencing community – with a clear connection to the U.S. Olympics fencing team. Penn State officials prioritized keeping Wes at Penn State over protecting its women athletes. Penn State’s inaction amounted to an official decision not to remedy the situation,” the suit stated.
A member of plaintiff counsel, Chelsea C. Weaver, released a statement on the litigation.
“Since she was little, Zara Moss had always dreamed of attending Penn State. That dream became a reality, when she received a full ride to fence for Penn State’s renowned fencing team. Zara’s dream became a nightmare when she was subjected to severe physical and psychological abuse at the hands of the Head Coach of Penn State’s Men’s and Women’s fencing teams, Wes Glon. It is time that athletes in this country stand up to abusive coaches and take the power into their own hands,” Weaver said.
“And universities like Penn State must evaluate their coaches based on factors that go far beyond mere wins and losses. By filing this lawsuit, Zara Moss is doing all she can to hold Glon and Penn State accountable. She hopes this action can help prevent other athletes from having their careers and dreams destroyed by a coach intoxicated with his own power and a university that chooses to look the other way.”
UPDATE
On July 1, Penn State filed a brief in support of its prior motion to dismiss the suit.
“Moss’s Title IX claim against the University (Count One), based on the University’s alleged ‘deliberate indifference’ to Glon’s alleged harassment, must be dismissed for three reasons. First, the majority of Moss’s allegations are time-barred. Second, even if the Court were to consider all of Moss’s allegations, most do not concern sex- or gender-based claims of harassment. The few allegations that facially allege sex-based harassment, when taken together, are neither severe nor pervasive enough to meet the pleading requirements of Title IX. Third, even if the Court found that some of Moss’s allegations constituted severe and pervasive sex-based harassment, and even if the Court determined that the University’s response to Moss’s first report of such conduct on March 17, 2021 constituted ‘deliberate indifference’ (it did not), Moss still has not pled a viable Title IX claim because she fails to allege that she suffered subsequent harassment as a result of that deliberate indifference,” per the dismissal brief.
“Moss’s emotional distress claims (Count II) fare no better. Her claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress fails because the University’s claimed conduct – failing to take her claims seriously and handle them in good faith – does not constitute ‘extreme and outrageous’ conduct sufficient to support an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim. Further, Moss has failed to allege that any emotional distress she experienced because of the University’s conduct resulted in any physical injury to her, which further dooms her intentional infliction of emotional distress claim. Moss’s negligent infliction of emotional distress claim is equally flawed. Moss has not pled a viable negligence claim against the University, and thereby has not pled an essential element of a negligent infliction of emotional distress claim. Finally, Moss attempts to hold the University vicariously liable for the emotional distress she claims to have experienced as a result of Glon’s alleged sex-based harassment under a respondeat superior theory (Count III). This claim is also unavailing. Moss has failed to plead sufficient plausible facts indicating that the purported harassment was committed in furtherance of the University’s mission.”
For counts of sexual harassment in violation of Title IX, negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress and respondeat superior liability against the university, the plaintiff is seeking the Court to order the following reliefs:
• Order Penn State to perform a thorough investigation into Wes Glon’s past and ongoing treatment towards former and current women Penn State fencers;
• Award Zara Moss compensatory and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial, including without limitation, damages for emotional distress, physical distress, loss of educational and athletic opportunities, loss of future prospects as a competitive fencer, including at the Olympics, loss of future career and sponsorship prospects, economic injuries and other direct and consequential damages;
• Award pre-judgment interest, attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to statutory or common law doctrines providing for such awards; and
• Grant such other and further relief that the Court deems just and proper.
The plaintiff is represented by Robert F. Daley and Scott M. Simon of Robert Peirce & Associates in Pittsburgh, plus Chelsea C. Weaver and Rex H. Elliott of Cooper & Elliott, in Columbus, Ohio.
The defendants are represented by Amy L. Piccola, James A. Keller and Shane P. Simon of Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr, plus Jeffrey A. Lutsky and Corey S.D. Norcross of Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, all in Philadelphia.
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania case 4:22-cv-00529
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com