A recent lawsuit against Duke has in no way complicated the standing of the 11 seniors and nine juniors on the men's lacrosse team who are plaintiffs in the suit, a University official said.
But despite that statement from John Burness, senior vice president for public and government relations, it remains to be seen how professors, students and other members of the Duke and Durham communities will treat the players in their remaining time at the University listed as defendants in their Feb. 21 suit.
"It can be awkward to be in a room with someone who has sued [you]," Professor of Law Thomas Metzloff said.
It is not the first suit against Duke by students alleging mistreatment on the part of University administrators or faculty.
In 2006 Kyle Dowd, Trinity '07 and a member of the 2005-2006 lacrosse team, filed suit against Duke and Visiting Associate Professor of Political Science Kim Curtis after receiving a failing grade in her course. He alleged his grades in the class changed from consistent 'C's before the rape allegations to 'F's after the scandal surfaced. The case was settled out of court.
Although the plaintiffs in the most recent lawsuit include 38 current and former students, the case is very different from the Dowd suit and will likely not warrant the same attention from the media and the University community, Metzloff said.
He expects the suit will not be as widely discussed on campus because it contains more intricacies than the Dowd case.
Among some Duke students and professors, however, critical opinions about the plaintiffs and the lawsuit are inevitable, Professor of Law James Coleman said. There is an important difference between a professor or student expressing a critical opinion and acting in a retaliatory or inappropriate manner, he added.
"Any professor who should retaliate against a student by calling him out in class, failing him or giving him a lower grade... would be inappropriate," Coleman said. He said students have their own prerogative in expressing negative opinions.
Provost Peter Lange said he doubted any Duke faculty member would act in an unprofessional manner toward the plaintiffs. He added, however, that in the case of mistreatment, students have many paths within the University to file a complaint, including the student ombudsperson.
As members of an athletic team, the plaintiffs will remain representatives of the University for the 2008 lacrosse season. Their scholarships are also unaffected by the suit, Burness said.
Negative effects of the suit on the players' athletic performance have not been seen thus far and cannot be predicted this early into the season and the lawsuit itself, men's lacrosse head coach John Danowski said.
The plaintiffs' decision not to transfer from Duke or leave the team speaks loudly about their positive feelings toward the University, he said.
"They're going to finish what they started here, and I think that's a very powerful statement," he added.
The plaintiffs will remain intent on completing the current lacrosse season victoriously, Danowski said.
"I think the guys are focused and are very strong mentally," he said. "They'll be fine."
Athletics and legal dealings with Duke are two separate areas that need not conflict with one another, said John Martin Conley, William Rand Kenan Jr. professor of law at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Law '77.
"You can play on a team today and have grievance with your school another day," he said.
Representatives of the Office of Student Affairs declined to comment on the suit, as did representatives of plaintiffs' attorney Charles Cooper.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.