PITTSBURGH – A dental resident at the University of Pittsburgh claims that he was falsely accused of a rape by a fellow medical resident and as a result, later suspended and dismissed from the program altogether.
John Doe, D.M.D. of Michigan filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on May 1 versus the University of Pittsburgh – of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education, UPMC Medical Education and the University Health Center of Pittsburgh.
“On April 26, 2022, Doe, who was a third-year resident, traveled to Atlanta, Ga. for an annual conference, which was attended by members of the Residency Program and supervisory personnel and faculty, including the Residency Program Director. This was a University and UPMC ME sponsored or promoted trip, which provided payment for residents’ flights and hotels; thus, the University and UPMC ME exercised substantial control. Among those that attended were first-year residents, including Jane Roe, S.M. and A.K. Prior to the conference Roe, as well as her friends, S.M. and A.K., had expressed disdain for Doe, who was appropriately demanding of the first-year residents in his role as a third-year resident,” the suit states.
“On April 28, 2022, Doe was seated at the hotel bar when he was approached by Jane Roe. Several other members of the Residency Program were present, including Residency Program Director. After talking and looking at Doe’s phone, Doe and Roe, who were both drinking alcohol, hugged with Doe wrapping his arm around Roe’s shoulder and Roe laying her head on his shoulder. Roe remained next to Doe for minutes and thereafter continued to approach Doe, touch Doe, and even place her buttocks in between Doe’s legs. Later that evening, Doe and Roe were kissing in the short hallway leading to the men’s room. After Roe began touching Doe’s penis, they entered the men’s room, continued kissing and briefly had consensual sexual intercourse.”
The suit continues that “after deciding that they should not continue having sex inside the hotel bathroom, they kissed and decided that Roe would exit first and Doe would exit a few minutes later” – at that point, according to the suit, “an older man walked towards and into the bathroom, and Roe walked past him”, while Roe “walked from the bathroom, was not crying and did not run from the bathroom.”
“After she saw her friends who had a shared disdain for Doe, however, Roe allegedly began crying and accusing Doe of rape. Rather than call the police or alert hotel staff, S.M. and A.K. took Roe to the hospital. Roe stated that she wanted a ‘rape kit,’ so she could ‘ruin [Doe’s] life.’ At the hospital, Roe stated that she did not want to press charges against Doe and just wanted a police report. Upon information and belief, Roe was more upset with the questions posed by the police officer at the hospital, who she referred to as a ‘very uneducated street cop,’ than she was when describing the alleged sexual assault,” the suit says.
“The morning of April 29, 2022, Roe, S.M. and A.K. returned to the hotel from the hospital. That day, Roe went to the hotel pool and lounge, and showed several Residency Program members her written and revised description of the alleged sexual assault, which S.M. told her to write. Doe and Roe saw each other in the lounge without incident. On April 30, 2022, Doe was informed of rumors that had been circulating about him and Roe, and then was told by the Residency Program Director and Department Chair that he was not to return to his assigned hospital/workplace. At that point, Doe was placed on paid administrative leave.
On May 2, 2022, Samantha Cascone, Vice President of UPMC ME and Heather Reading, HR Director, contacted Dr. Doe to discuss the ‘events’ in Atlanta before he would be approved to return to work. Doe responded by requesting that his attorney by permitted to participate and that an explanation of what he was being accused of be provided.”
Roe went on to file a Title IX complaint against the plaintiff on May 9, 2022, where she alleged on the night in question that he attempted to kiss her, forced her into the bathroom and raped her both anally and vaginally, before she was able to escape.
On June 30, 2022, Doe was then placed on unpaid administrative leave and would remain there for approximately 14 months, or the duration of the Title IX complaint investigation.
The suit explains that Title IX regulations approved in 2020 mandated that a respondent be “afforded procedural rights, including but not limited to, a live-hearing and the opportunity to cross-examine in post-secondary institutions.”
But Doe alleges he was not afforded those rights, and was instead subject to a biased investigation, which in March 2023, concluded that “Roe’s allegation that Doe forced her into a hotel men’s room where he engaged in forcible intercourse was more likely than not true.”
Ultimately, and despite having access to the same evidence as UPMC’s Title IX investigation team, the Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney’s Office declined to bring criminal charges against Doe.
Doe claims that the Title IX investigator from the University of Pittsburgh’s Office of Compliance, Investigations and Ethics, Joseph L. Bielevicz, did not consult surveillance video of the area in the vicinity of the incident, which Doe says refuted several parts of Roe’s story, and incorporated hearsay statements meant to damage Doe’s credibility.
At the conclusion of a year-long stint of unpaid administrative leave, UPMC ME HR Director Heather Reading sent Doe a letter in July 2023 noting that because he had not yet completed the training program, he was being offered three options: “(A) Receive a certificate for partial completion of your training program marking the end of your employment with University Health Center of Pittsburgh; (B) Request that the program provide justification to petition for a waiver of your remaining rotation to complete the program; or (C) Re-apply to the program to complete your remaining rotation.”
“On Jul 25, 2023, Doe provided justification in support of his request that the program waive the remaining rotation per option (B). Doe completed and surpassed the case number required for graduation from the UPMC ME program. Doe passed the written national board examination,” the suit says.
“At the time of his dismissal, Doe had only 7 weeks of the 36-month residency left to finish. Yet, UPMC ME refused to provide him with a certificate of completion. In fact, UPMC ME failed to even respond to his July 25, 2023 request that he be provided a certificate of completion.”
In August 2023, Doe was informed that he had been emailed (to a pitt.edu email address that he did not use) a letter dated April 6, 2023 from Kenyon R. Bonner, Vice Provost of Student Affairs, which explained he was dismissed from the University of Pittsburgh, effective that same day, barred from the campus.
The letter further explained that Doe had until 5 p.m. on April 19, 2023 to submit a petition for the postponement of sanctions, pending appeal and a separate petition for appeal with the University Review Board. However, because he didn’t receive the email until months later, Doe then attempted to enter the appeals process.
“The letter was not mailed to Doe or sent to his attorney. Thus, this letter dismissing Doe from the Residency Program and barring him from the campus, was sent at the same time that the Title IX Office and various administrators and officers of defendants were preparing for and participating in ‘The Pittsburgh Universities Believe Survivors March,” the suit states.
“The Title IX investigation was pending for more than 14 months before Doe was notified of the decision. On or about Oct. 3, 2023, the University Review Board issued a decision denying Doe’s appeal. Doe has suffered substantial harm and damages as a result of defendants’ conduct.”
For counts of violating Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, violating the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, breach of contract and intentional interference with existing and prospective economic advantage, the plaintiff is seeking economic and monetary damages, compensatory damages, attorney’s fees and costs, pre-judgment interest and punitive damages.
The plaintiff is represented by Robert A. Bracken of Bracken Law Firm, in Pittsburgh.
The defendants have not yet obtained legal counsel.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 2:24-cv-00656
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com