4 min read
Male Student Wins $136,782 Verdict Against Indiana University in Title IX Lawsuit
N
Nishica Srivastava
November 26, 2024

Table of Contents
Erny v. Indiana University
Case Background
On March 17, 2022, Alex Erny filed a Title IX lawsuit against Indiana University challenging his three-semester suspension following a university disciplinary hearing that found he had sexually assaulted a female student. He sued Indiana University, alleging it violated his Title IX rights by conducting a biased hearing influenced by his sex. Erny argued that the process was unfair because he was not allowed to cross-examine his accuser or have legal representation during the hearing. Additionally, he described the panel's final disciplinary finding as "perplexing." The case was filed in the United States District Court, Indiana Southern (Indianapolis). The civil rights lawsuit was assigned to Judge Richard L. Young and referred to Magistrate Judge Mario Garcia. [Case number: 1:22cv524]Cause
Damages
If Alex Erny succeeded at trial, the only damages he could recover were his economic losses from the three-semester interruption of his education. Emotional damages were unavailable under Supreme Court precedent governing Title IX actions.Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
- Plaintiff(s):
- Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Annemarie Alonso | Jonathan Charles Little
- Defendant(s): Board of Trustees of Indiana University
- Counsel for Defendant(s): Adam Kyle Mills | Janica Pierce Tucker
Claims
Alex Erny filed a lawsuit against Indiana University, initially as a John Doe Plaintiff, but later chose to proceed under his own name. He claimed the university violated his Title IX rights by subjecting him to intentional sex-based discrimination. Erny argued that the hearing process was unfair because he could not effectively utilize his attorney or cross-examine Madeline Moore. To support his case, Erny cited evidence of external pressures that, he alleged, created an anti-male bias at the university. He also referenced university data that, in his view, suggested a gender-based bias in disciplinary proceedings. Additionally, Erny described the hearing panel's final decision as "perplexing," particularly given its findings. In presenting his case, Erny clarified that he did not intend to revisit the events of June 16, 2020, or whether a sexual assault occurred. Instead, he focused exclusively on challenging the investigation's fairness and the hearing process.Defense
Jury Verdict
Court Documents:
Available for purchase upon requestTags
Civil Rights
Sexual Assault
Sex Discrimination
Legal Representation
Title Ix Lawsuit
About the Author
NS
Nishica Srivastava
Writer