A case that hit the Supreme Court of Indiana in Haegart v. University Of Evansville,talked about the recent legal hoops that an undisclosed private university had to go through before they could even think about the termination of one of their proofers who a was tenured. It was not enough to simply fire him.
So the court had to recognize that if the case applied Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which was not possible to apply to the case because the terms and policies for a terminating a tenured professor were completely different.
Litigation attorney’s had to seek out the ignorant and in this case they saw that the University was going to be terminating the professor because the conduct that he was accused of sexual harassment on a new student in an employee break room in front of other employees. The court and the litigation attorneys int his case found that the employment contract and the faculty manual found that it was constituted as sexual harassment. It may of in fact been outlined in the polices and procedures. The procedures for investigating the firing held on to the fact that the professor was given the right amount of time to consider the notice of intent to fire and the claims against his termination as outlined in the employee handbook.
The professor’s tenor was then rescind and he was take offing go the faculty. He joined the University of Evansville back ion 1982, then chaired the department of English from 2000 to 2005. He was accused of walking up to a female student calling her “sweetie” and then stroking his fingers under her chin and her neck. The formal complaint against the tenured professor was filed by a coworker who witnessed the whole thing.
Litigation attorneys investigate and determine the cases viability. They also determine if the case can be won considering each piece of evidence. In this case there was evidence that the professor had harassed a student, making it a viable case.