69° Fort Worth
All TCU. All the time.

TCU 360

TCU 360

All TCU. All the time.

TCU 360

In this image taken from video, police are deployed outside the Israeli Embassy in Washington, Sunday, Feb. 25, 2024, after an active-duty member of the U.S. Air Force was critically injured after setting himself ablaze outside the diplomatic compound. (WJLA via AP)
What we’re reading: Active-duty U.S. airman sets himself on fire, Abbott supports IVF and more
By Zahra Ahmad, Staff Writer
Published Feb 26, 2024
Texas governor Greg Abbott voiced support for IVF procedures after a ruling by the Alabama Supreme Court, Star Trek actor dies and more of what we're reading.

Court won’t allow graduate students to join discrimination suit

Water Fountain BLUU Auditorium

A court in the Northern District of Texas ruled Jane Does Nos. 4 and 5 could not join the lawsuit with the other plaintiffs, Does Nos. 1, 2 and 3.

According to the order, filed June 26 in the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Texas, Jane Doe No. 1 can add the Title VII claim to an amended complaint, which must be filed by July 3.

The order gives the plaintiffs until July 13 to respond to TCU’s motions to dismiss.

TCU objects to adding new plaintiffs to lawsuit

Lawyers for TCU filed a brief saying Jane Does Nos. 4 and 5 shouldn’t be added as plaintiffs to the lawsuit.

In the document filed June 25 in the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Texas, attorneys at McDonald Sanders said the claims of Does Nos. 4 and 5 do not meet the requirements for permissive joinder.

“Granting leave to amend for a third time, thereby allowing Does 4 and 5 to pursue their unrelated claims, will result in undue prejudice to the Defendants, cause unnecessary delay of the case and would ultimately be futile,” according to the brief filed on behalf of TCU.

TCU’s objection, filed June 25.

This comes after the June 10 filing of an amended complaint, listing the allegations of Jane Does Nos. 4 and 5 against the university. In a joint report, Jane Does Nos. 1, 2 and 3 said there was a “reasonable likelihood” additional plaintiffs may join the suit.

The brief alleges the claims of Does Nos. 4 and 5 do not arise from the “same transaction”; instead, their complaints are based on actions of different people at different times.

According to the document, denying the plaintiffs’ motion to file a third complaint would not prejudice Does Nos. 4 and 5 because they would still be able to file their own lawsuits.

In addition, the brief alleges Does Nos. 4 and 5 fail to offer specific claims of how they were intentionally discriminated against or how their educational opportunities were curtailed by TCU based on race or gender discrimination.

More to Discover