Er, a law professor is suing his dean for retaliating against him after the law prof accused the dean of sexual harassment.

Among the dean’s alleged sexually harassing behaviors:

The suit said the professor complained [to university authorities] about alleged inappropriate touching and comments involving women colleagues, including a bare-skin, summer-dress “caress” that [the professor, Raymond] Ku and his wife found “unnerving and creepy.”

The lawsuit also claimed the dean questioned Ku about circumcision as the professor prepared to convert to Judaism. Mitchell said the conversion would put Ku in two of his favorite groups — Asian and Jewish, the lawsuit said.

Are you outraged yet?

Well, how about this:

The dean is rumored to have slept with a law student! The dean has been married and divorced four times! Someone told Ku that the dean makes demeaning statements about women! (UD is getting all of this from Ku’s complaint, which you can read here. Scroll down.)

When you combine these transgressions with the dean’s outrageous assertion that Ku has been been put in two of the dean’s favorite groups, it all adds up to …. what? What seems just? A million in damages? Two million?

Trackback URL for this post:

5 Responses to “News of the Weird”

  1. gtwma Says:

    “According to the lawsuit, a member of the dean’s search committee that was involved in hiring Mitchell in 2011 had concerns about the number of wives Mitchell had had, his dating students at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., and “his interactions with women generally.” The committee member wasn’t identified.

    The lawsuit said the search committee was aware that Mitchell had divorced his wife to marry a student while at GWU, divorced that wife and then married a woman who joined the GWU law faculty. That marriage also ended in divorce, the lawsuit said.”

    All that while at GWU? Maybe Yeshiva has some competition!

  2. Mr Punch Says:

    But Ku’s not suing over the sexual harassment, he’s suing over the retaliation. There’s a real and recurring problem here: what does an institution do about someone who (sometimes repeatedly) puts forth baseless charges, but who is protected by law as a whistle-blower?

  3. Margaret Soltan Says:

    Mr Punch: I take the point – the case is about a certain activity of retaliation, not about what might have provoked it. And yes – it strikes me as a complex legal problem. But one way to tackle this particular case is to see whether even one other person corroborates anything significant that Ku says (Ku’s wife agreeing that she felt creeped out by some of Mitchell’s behavior doesn’t cut it.). So far a high-ranking woman at Ku’s university has strongly supported Mitchell. No one, even anonymously, has joined Ku, so far as I know.

  4. Treehugger Says:

    The guy went to Williams. Nuf said.

  5. Subodh Chandra Says:

    Please read.

    The amended complaint, containing more details and concerns, is linked within the article.

    Your narrative underplays the concerns.

Comment on this Entry

Latest UD posts at IHE