Former FTC Commissioner and ex-ASS Law professor Joshua Wright’s $108 million lawsuit against two of his former 1Ls can move forward after a Virginia judge denied the plea in bar lodged by the defendants. As a reminder, Wright isn’t denying that he slept with his 1L students, but claims that they defamed him when they said they found themselves in these years-long sexual engagements with their professor because he leveraged his influence to advance their careers and, relatedly, could withdraw that influence when they weren’t compliant.
He says this cost him millions because clients abandoned his private sector venture when the women told their story to Law360. As though clients were cool with the part about using seating charts as “Analog Tinder” — which he does NOT claim is false — but that they drew the line at the idea that the women felt they were trapped in the relationships because of his influence. Not knowing Wright’s client base, I’d say they were probably more concerned with the bit that he’s conceding is true.
Not to mention that the latter claim seems like the defendants’ opinion and thus non-actionable, but here we are.
Kirkland & Ellis partner Elyse Dorsey, one of the defendants along with Freshfields counsel Angela Landry, discussed the ruling on social media. Another aspect of the ruling is that the case will use statements made during the George Mason University Title IX process against the defendants with the court deciding that those aren’t “reasonably” protected.
It would be one thing if the subject of a Title IX complaint categorically denied the accusation and pursued a defendant for defamation, but Wright’s argument is that sleeping with his students was all cool because there was no policy against it at the time. That seems like a complaint he can maybe raise against the school, not the basis of a libel claim against the former students.
Though lawsuits against the accusers serve another purpose that doesn’t necessarily require them to be $108 million winners…
Those targeted by harassment keep silent too often in the best of circumstances. When courts decline to invoke anti-SLAPP laws and force victims to go through the costly legal process, it throws more upon the legal scaffolding that allows perpetrators to hold the threat of protracted litigation over anyone willing to stand up to them. Not every defendant is going to be a senior Biglaw attorney and precedents like these put more pressure on the accuser to cave or stay quiet in the first place.
The trial is on target for March of next year.
Earlier:Sexual Harassment Allegations Mount Against Former FTC Commissioner & Law Professor
Ex-Law Professor Sues Former Students For $108M Over Sexual Harassment Allegations
Law School’s ‘Restrictions’ On Professor’s Contact With Students During Sexual Harassment Probe Apparently Didn’t Cover Auctioning Off A Date
We Shouldn’t Have To Say This, But Job Interviews Are Not Your Personal Dating App
SOMEONE Keeps Editing Joshua Wright’s Wikipedia Page To Downplay The Whole ‘Sleeping With 1Ls’ Thing
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
