By Gina Passarella, From The Legal Intelligencer

A softball player at Saint Joseph’s University has sued the school for Title IX violations stemming from allegations of a “sexually charged” hazing culture within the women’s softball team.

The lawsuit, which was filed Tuesday in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania as a Jane Doe action, is against the university and the softball team’s coach, Terri Adams.

The suit comes almost two months after allegations of hazing at the school first leaked, causing the university to announce May 1 that it was canceling the remainder of the team’s softball season. Doe alleged in the complaint that when word broke of the hazing, her teammates and coaches assumed she was the source and began retaliating against her. Doe withdrew from the university this year, leaving her softball scholarship behind.

Derek Jokelson of Jokelson Law Group in Philadelphia is representing the plaintiff, who started as a freshman at the university in 2013 after being recruited to join the softball team. Jokelson declined to comment beyond the complaint. There was no counsel listed for Saint Joseph’s University or Adams. A school spokeswoman said the university was aware of the filing and had no comment.

The complaint details an initiation week for freshman softball players that included letters calling them “low-level swine” and “scum” and referring to the team’s coaches in a sexual nature. Doe alleged she was repeatedly asked by her teammates about her sexual orientation and told she was gay and should come out of the closet. Teammates who associated with Doe were called lesbians, according to the complaint.

Among the numerous activities Doe was alleged to have been forced to participate in, the complaint alleges she had to dress up as a male rapper and simulate sexual intercourse on top of another freshman in front of the whole team, read a letter before the whole team declaring her worthlessness, recount her sexual experiences, plank in the middle of a road in the midst of traffic and be taped dancing so that it could later be posted on social media.

The complaint said Doe was asked but refused to simulate oral sex on a wine bottle while being videotaped, simulate manual sex over her clothes and simulate their coach having an orgasm. The plaintiff said other teammates did perform such acts.

Doe said the coach and the university’s administration became aware of the hazing after one freshman became so intoxicated as part of the hazing that she had to be hospitalized, according to the complaint. But Doe said no formal investigation took place during the 2013-14 school year.

Instead of reporting the hazing, according to the complaint, Adams allegedly participated in it, calling Doe “sippy shit in pants” to explain Doe’s worthlessness.

Doe further alleged the hazing picked up again when she was a sophomore during the fall 2014 softball season. She said her schoolwork and mental health suffered, she had suicidal thoughts and she was forced to leave the university this year.

That was not before Doe’s mother spoke with Adams about her daughter’s complaints, at which point Adams promised things would improve, according to the complaint. But Doe alleged nothing changed. When the news reports of the hazing broke in April, Doe’s teammates allegedly threatened Doe, who they assumed was the source, and said they would “rip her head off and shove a softball down her throat.”

Doe alleged that Adams impeded the university’s investigation that ensued after media reports shed light on the alleged hazing. Doe cited to an open letter of apology to the school that was drafted by an upperclassman on the team. That letter, Doe alleged, admitted to some of the harassment.

Doe alleged the defendants violated Title IX by creating a hostile environment that condoned a “culture of pervasive sexual harassment.” She also alleged a count of retaliation under Title IX for the coaching staff’s intimidation and threats for raising awareness of the alleged harassment.

The defendants were also sued for negligence for failing to inform Doe of the true culture of the team, which they had pitched to her prior to her joining as “family-oriented,” and one that instills “Christian values.” Other claims against both defendants were for intentional infliction of emotional distress, breach of contract and promissory estoppel. Doe sued only the university for a violation of the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law for recruiting Doe to the softball team on the alleged false premise that the team “upheld the dignity of all attendees.”

Doe is seeking special, compensatory and punitive damages as well as attorney fees.

For more on this story go to: http://www.thelegalintelligencer.com/id=1202727023196/St-Joes-Sued-for-Softball-Teams-Sexually-Charged-Hazing#ixzz3amQJLrHf