1. Home
  2. |Experience
  3. |Education

Education

Overview

Today’s educational institutions face complex, interconnected challenges that demand a comprehensive and collaborative approach. Crowell & Moring’s Education Practice brings together a diverse team of attorneys with expertise across multiple disciplines, including government contracts, intellectual property, labor and employment, investigations, and privacy and cybersecurity. Our interdisciplinary approach enables us to provide colleges, universities, academic medical centers, public and independent schools, and other educational institutions with knowledgeable and solution-oriented guidance to help navigate the intricate landscape of education law. By combining our deep understanding of the education sector with experience from across the firm, we deliver innovative solutions that address the multifaceted legal, operational, financial, and regulatory challenges these institutions face.

Crowell’s Education team advises on a wide variety of matters, including:

  • Government Contracts/Grants. We defend grantees in government investigations, audits, and suspension and debarment proceedings and counsel on cutting-edge legal issues that arise in this context, including those involving intellectual property rights, domestic sourcing restrictions, performance reporting, administration of subawards, program income, program integrity requirements, cost allowability and accounting, and conflicts of interest. 
  • Title IV Advising, Investigations, and Compliance. Our team has significant experience guiding universities through campus challenges related to national origin and antisemitism. We investigate sensitive student and faculty allegations, advising on the intersection of Title VI and academic freedom, and navigate investigations by the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights.
  • Title IX Litigation and Compliance. We have extensive experience defending educational institutions against Title IX claims brought by both complainants and respondents arising out of student disciplinary proceedings, advising on evolving Title IX standards for protecting both respondents and complainants, and assisting in the development of sexual misconduct policies and adjudication procedures for students, faculty, and staff. We also assist institutions through the regulatory rulemaking process, including preparation of comments and other submissions.
  • Investigations. We regularly are called upon to advise on and conduct investigations of sensitive allegations of both current and historical sexual misconduct on campus, and other forms of discrimination, abuse, or harassment, including inquiries related to the ADA, Title VI (with particular expertise on claims of discrimination based on national origin/antisemitism), Title VII, and Title IX. As part of this practice, we regularly assist and see clients through investigations initiated by the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. Our clients include colleges and universities, as well as independent and public primary and secondary schools.
  • Intellectual Property (IP). We have experience representing educational institutions in the full scope of IP protection and commercialization matters. We represent numerous research universities in obtaining patents for inventions resulting from university research, advise on the licensing of their trademarks and on the licensing and enforcement of their patent portfolio, negotiate and draft complex licenses and technology transfer agreements, maximize universities’ return on investment to provide a revenue stream to support tech transfer objectives, and counsel on trademark, copyright, and trade secret matters.
  • Academic Medical Centers. Academic medical centers execute on their unique missions of education, research, and training while also competing in the health care marketplace as health care providers. We counsel these clients on traditional reimbursement, fraud and abuse, and commercial transaction issues including academic affiliation agreements. In addition, we provide legal advice on a variety of matters involving graduate medical education, scientific integrity, research objectivity, human subjects research and the Common Rule, FDA reporting obligations, the Shelby Amendment expansion of the Freedom of Information Act, HIPAA compliance, inventorship and technology transfer, and the NIH grants process. We also deal with antitrust issues in collaborative activities among research centers.
  • Student Affairs. In addition to the student conduct issues referenced above, we advise schools regarding the range of issues relating to regulation of students’ freedoms of expression and association, privacy of student health information and other personal data under FERPA, and regulatory requirements under the American Disabilities Act and similar provisions as to accommodations for learning within the academy.
  • Privacy and Cybersecurity. Our team guides colleges, universities, academic medical centers, and research institutions through the myriad federal and other laws governing the collection, use, and protection of data. We assess data flow and cybersecurity practices to strengthen defenses against cyber intrusions and identify and protect vulnerable and valuable digital information. We also assist with vendor oversight by evaluating existing contracts and developing improved procurement protocols. When data breaches involving personal information, trade secrets, and intellectual property occur, we help educational institutions manage these incidents, investigating the scope, determining whether individual and governmental notification is required, and defending federal and state enforcement actions and class actions.
  • Foreign Influence and Affiliations. The uptick in the number of cases that the Department of Justice has brought involving researchers and their undisclosed relationships with China have prompted colleges, universities, and research institutions to examine their relationships and affiliations with foreign entities. We help educate, counsel, and advise our clients on potential conflicts of interest and disclosure requirements that may give rise to violations of various federal fraud statutes and the Economic Espionage Act. To guard against any potential legal exposure, we also work with our clients to adopt guidelines governing affiliations with foreign entities and to guard against potential insider threat cases where proprietary information may be at stake, including conducting internal investigations.
  • Labor and Employment. We have a broad-ranging Labor and Employment Practice. We provide affirmative action and pay equity advice and counseling, conduct discrimination and harassment investigations, advise on promotion and tenure issues, and conduct labor negotiations. We also advise on compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), and other wage/hour issues. We perform audits regarding a wide range of compliance obligations in advance of litigation or governmental investigations, and advise on appropriate remedial actions and best practices. We have extensive experience handling complex labor disputes, and counsel universities with respect to collective bargaining negotiations and contract administration, including grievance arbitration.

In addition, our Education Practice advises on a range of other issues, including eligibility issues regarding Title IV of the Higher Education Act (HEA), health risks and liabilities pertaining to sports and particularly concussion-related matters, lobbying and government ethics issues, and renewable energy procurement for higher education institutions.

Case Studies

|

    • Issue: Two students alleged that a large private university had failed to comply with Title IX and the university’s policies and procedures pertaining to a disciplinary proceeding in which it investigated and adjudicated the students’ cross-complaints of sexual misconduct. Specifically, they sought money damages based on alleged violations of Title IX, breach of contract, estoppel and reliance, and negligence.
    • Action: The firm reviewed and strategized regarding the complaint, performed extensive research on university liability for hazing and third-party conduct, analyzed the applicability of Title IX, and drafted and completed the motion to dismiss.
    • Outcome:  A district court granted the university’s motion to dismiss, dismissing three state law claims with prejudice and the Title IX claim without prejudice. The plaintiff appealed to the circuit court, which affirmed the district court’s order, finding that the plaintiff did not show the university treated him differently because of his sex, while also ruling in the university’s favor on the breach of contract, estoppel and reliance, and negligence actions. This circuit court’s opinion provides important insight on its view of the appropriate pleading standard for Title IX cases—an issue on which circuit courts are split.
    • Issue: Two students alleged that a large private university had failed to comply with Title IX and the university’s policies and procedures pertaining to a disciplinary proceeding in which it investigated and adjudicated the students’ cross-complaints of sexual misconduct. Specifically, they sought money damages based on alleged violations of Title IX, breach of contract, estoppel and reliance, and negligence.
    • Action: The firm reviewed and strategized regarding the complaint, performed extensive research on university liability for hazing and third-party conduct, analyzed the applicability of Title IX, and drafted and completed the motion to dismiss.
    • Outcome:  A district court granted the university’s motion to dismiss, dismissing three state law claims with prejudice and the Title IX claim without prejudice. The plaintiff appealed to the circuit court, which affirmed the district court’s order, finding that the plaintiff did not show the university treated him differently because of his sex, while also ruling in the university’s favor on the breach of contract, estoppel and reliance, and negligence actions. This circuit court’s opinion provides important insight on its view of the appropriate pleading standard for Title IX cases—an issue on which circuit courts are split.

    • Issue: Two alumnae from a coed college preparatory school wrote letters revealing a sexual relationship that one of them had with a teacher while enrolled at the school. Shortly after receiving these letters, the school’s Board of Trustees commissioned an independent investigation into these allegations and any other inappropriate faculty-student relationships.
    • Action: Our firm conducted an independent investigation for the school, conducting 110 interviews with 76 individuals, including 33 former students who attended between the 1960s and 1990s. We also interviewed many current or former faculty and staff members or administrators while reviewing thousands of pages of documents including personnel files of 29 employees of the school. Our investigation uncovered instances of sexual misconduct and inappropriate emotional relationships between faculty and students spanning several decades.
    • Outcome:  We prepared a comprehensive report recounting credible accounts of misconduct and submitted the report to a special board committee created to examine the findings and make recommendations to the Board of Trustees. The school then released a public statement on the report and its findings, which also discussed systemic and cultural changes made at the school over the years and potential action steps the school was evaluating and would consider implementing in the future.
    • Issue: Two alumnae from a coed college preparatory school wrote letters revealing a sexual relationship that one of them had with a teacher while enrolled at the school. Shortly after receiving these letters, the school’s Board of Trustees commissioned an independent investigation into these allegations and any other inappropriate faculty-student relationships.
    • Action: Our firm conducted an independent investigation for the school, conducting 110 interviews with 76 individuals, including 33 former students who attended between the 1960s and 1990s. We also interviewed many current or former faculty and staff members or administrators while reviewing thousands of pages of documents including personnel files of 29 employees of the school. Our investigation uncovered instances of sexual misconduct and inappropriate emotional relationships between faculty and students spanning several decades.
    • Outcome:  We prepared a comprehensive report recounting credible accounts of misconduct and submitted the report to a special board committee created to examine the findings and make recommendations to the Board of Trustees. The school then released a public statement on the report and its findings, which also discussed systemic and cultural changes made at the school over the years and potential action steps the school was evaluating and would consider implementing in the future.

    • Issue: Due to the impending confluence of the flu season and the COVID-19 pandemic, a university president issued an executive order requiring that all students, employees, and faculty working, studying, or living on campus receive the flu vaccine, subject to exemptions and accommodations. Five students, faculty, and staff sued the university, seeking to enjoin the executive order. Plaintiffs claimed that the executive order was an ultra viresact; violated federal and state constitutional rights to privacy, bodily integrity, and autonomy; and abridged their equal protection and First Amendment free exercise of religion rights.
    • Action: In less than 10 days, our team marshalled nine expert declarations, including leading national immunology and public health experts, arguing that the university president had authority to issue the order, that the order did not violate federal and state privacy rights or equal protection and First Amendment rights, and that the balance of harm weighed in the university’s favor because of the public health risk to individuals and the risk of an overburdened health system.
    • Outcome: After a lengthy hearing, the court immediately denied plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction. The denial of the motion was not a final determination of the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims, however, within a week of the decision, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their case with prejudice, bringing a swift end to their challenge to the university’s flu vaccination mandate.
    • Issue: Due to the impending confluence of the flu season and the COVID-19 pandemic, a university president issued an executive order requiring that all students, employees, and faculty working, studying, or living on campus receive the flu vaccine, subject to exemptions and accommodations. Five students, faculty, and staff sued the university, seeking to enjoin the executive order. Plaintiffs claimed that the executive order was an ultra viresact; violated federal and state constitutional rights to privacy, bodily integrity, and autonomy; and abridged their equal protection and First Amendment free exercise of religion rights.
    • Action: In less than 10 days, our team marshalled nine expert declarations, including leading national immunology and public health experts, arguing that the university president had authority to issue the order, that the order did not violate federal and state privacy rights or equal protection and First Amendment rights, and that the balance of harm weighed in the university’s favor because of the public health risk to individuals and the risk of an overburdened health system.
    • Outcome: After a lengthy hearing, the court immediately denied plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction. The denial of the motion was not a final determination of the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims, however, within a week of the decision, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their case with prejudice, bringing a swift end to their challenge to the university’s flu vaccination mandate.

    • Issue: A tenured university statistics professor filed a complaint asserting violations of the Equal Pay Act (EPA) and alleged that she had been discriminated against on the basis of her sex in violation of Title VII with respect to a series of compensation decisions made over several years. The case involved contentious privilege disputes and battling experts.
    • Action: Throughout the litigation, our team consistently argued that the plaintiff had failed to identify a “comparator” who performed a job that required substantially equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and that was performed under similar working conditions within the same establishment, as is required by the EPA. We also put forth that the pay disparities between the plaintiff and her colleagues resulted from legitimate considerations, including seniority and relatively superior academic performance.
    • Outcome: Nearly five years later, an Order dismissing the case was signed and formalized the parties’ settlement of the matter. The litigation illustrates the unsettled nature of some of the legal issues, such as the scope of certain EPA and Title VII defenses, as a key decision on which the team relied in its Summary Judgment briefing was reversed by the DC Circuit mid-litigation.
    • Issue: A tenured university statistics professor filed a complaint asserting violations of the Equal Pay Act (EPA) and alleged that she had been discriminated against on the basis of her sex in violation of Title VII with respect to a series of compensation decisions made over several years. The case involved contentious privilege disputes and battling experts.
    • Action: Throughout the litigation, our team consistently argued that the plaintiff had failed to identify a “comparator” who performed a job that required substantially equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and that was performed under similar working conditions within the same establishment, as is required by the EPA. We also put forth that the pay disparities between the plaintiff and her colleagues resulted from legitimate considerations, including seniority and relatively superior academic performance.
    • Outcome: Nearly five years later, an Order dismissing the case was signed and formalized the parties’ settlement of the matter. The litigation illustrates the unsettled nature of some of the legal issues, such as the scope of certain EPA and Title VII defenses, as a key decision on which the team relied in its Summary Judgment briefing was reversed by the DC Circuit mid-litigation.

    • Issue: An independent K-12 school received a report from counsel for an alumnus alleging abuse by a faculty member during the 1980s. Needing to conduct an independent investigation of faculty misconduct with students, the firm retained Crowell.
    • Action: Our team conducted a seven-month investigation, including multiple interviews with 54 individuals and reviewing available school files, yearbooks, and other documentary evidence provided by victims and other witnesses. Our investigation focused on faculty misconduct of a sexual nature with students, and conduct by faculty with students that otherwise crossed appropriate emotional or physical boundaries, extending back to the earliest reports received.
    • Outcome:  The school released our 60-page report on the investigation, which identified credible reports of misconduct involving eight faculty members that occurred between the mid-1970s and 2008. Our report also described the school’s contemporaneous knowledge of and responses to the misconduct of all eight faculty members and included a discussion of the cultural context in which the misconduct occurred. Importantly, the report noted that the school has taken significant steps in the last decade to address faculty misconduct and to protect its students.
    • Issue: An independent K-12 school received a report from counsel for an alumnus alleging abuse by a faculty member during the 1980s. Needing to conduct an independent investigation of faculty misconduct with students, the firm retained Crowell.
    • Action: Our team conducted a seven-month investigation, including multiple interviews with 54 individuals and reviewing available school files, yearbooks, and other documentary evidence provided by victims and other witnesses. Our investigation focused on faculty misconduct of a sexual nature with students, and conduct by faculty with students that otherwise crossed appropriate emotional or physical boundaries, extending back to the earliest reports received.
    • Outcome:  The school released our 60-page report on the investigation, which identified credible reports of misconduct involving eight faculty members that occurred between the mid-1970s and 2008. Our report also described the school’s contemporaneous knowledge of and responses to the misconduct of all eight faculty members and included a discussion of the cultural context in which the misconduct occurred. Importantly, the report noted that the school has taken significant steps in the last decade to address faculty misconduct and to protect its students.

    • Issue: A public university recruited a faculty member to lead a 20-year old research program that was a coordinating center for nationwide human-subject research studies funded by the federal government and private sponsors. After a few years, the faculty member tried to move the entire program, including the program’s director, staff, computer system, research database, and sponsor relationships to a newly formed “institute” under the auspices of a private university that promised a higher salary.
    • Action: Representing the public university system’s governing board, we filed a lawsuit and obtained a preliminary injunction prohibiting the faculty member and the private university attempting the takeover from exercising management and control over a key computer system and research databases. The co-opting university engaged in an aggressive litigation and public relations campaign, denying any wrongdoing, falsely accusing the public university of interfering with medical research, and contending that no damages accrue from a public university’s loss of a research program that generated no profits.
    • Outcome: The Crowell team defeated multiple pre-trial challenges, and got the case set for a jury trial that would coincide with proceedings to hold the co-opting university and faculty member in contempt of the injunction. The private university’s leaders who had condoned the co-opting were forced to resign, and on the eve of trial, it agreed to settle by making a public apology and paying the public university $50 million.
    • Issue: A public university recruited a faculty member to lead a 20-year old research program that was a coordinating center for nationwide human-subject research studies funded by the federal government and private sponsors. After a few years, the faculty member tried to move the entire program, including the program’s director, staff, computer system, research database, and sponsor relationships to a newly formed “institute” under the auspices of a private university that promised a higher salary.
    • Action: Representing the public university system’s governing board, we filed a lawsuit and obtained a preliminary injunction prohibiting the faculty member and the private university attempting the takeover from exercising management and control over a key computer system and research databases. The co-opting university engaged in an aggressive litigation and public relations campaign, denying any wrongdoing, falsely accusing the public university of interfering with medical research, and contending that no damages accrue from a public university’s loss of a research program that generated no profits.
    • Outcome: The Crowell team defeated multiple pre-trial challenges, and got the case set for a jury trial that would coincide with proceedings to hold the co-opting university and faculty member in contempt of the injunction. The private university’s leaders who had condoned the co-opting were forced to resign, and on the eve of trial, it agreed to settle by making a public apology and paying the public university $50 million.

Contacts

See All Professionals

Insights

View All Insights

Representative Matters

 

Federal Grants and Government Procurement

  • Counseled a university on its contractual rights and obligations as the majority partner responsible for the operation of a National Laboratory.
  • Advised National Laboratory on Government Contracts issues, including cost allowability issues and contract negotiation risks and strategies.
  • Counseled universities regarding cost accounting regulations and standards for U.S. Government contracts and grants, including labor charging practices, cost allocation methods, and statutory limits on the availability of funds.
  • Represented university in connection with Inspector General investigation of potential overbilling under federal government contracts and grants.
  • Represented university in connection with mandatory disclosures to the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services.
  • Represented university in dispute with prime contractor regarding claims for delay and non-payment.
  • Conducted review and analysis of conflict of interest issues raised by government agency that awarded large research grant.
  • On-going counseling with respect to university's obligations under an operation and management contract for a Federally Funded Research and Development Center, including Buy American and domestic preference requirements.
  • Advised university regarding potential protest under multiple federal government procurements.
  • Assessed risk of termination of contract with university and the Department of Health and Human Services.

Academic Affairs and Governance

  • Conducted internal investigations and advised universities with respect to resolving Title IX complaints, and developing and implementing Title IX compliance procedures, including the intersection with FERPA and other laws.
  • Represented Hastings College of the Law, University of California, in a landmark First Amendment case before the United States Supreme Court regarding a student group's expressive association rights. The Court upheld the law school's decision not to fund a religious student group after the group refused to comply with the school's nondiscrimination and open membership policies. See Christian Legal Soc'y v. Martinez,130 S. Ct. 2971 (2010), on remand, Christian Legal Soc'y v. Wu, 626 F.3d 483 (9th Cir. 2010).
  • Advised on regulatory compliance with Department of Education Program Integrity Regulations. 
  • Advised on various aspects of Sanctuary Campus issues.
  • Submitted amicus brief to United States Supreme Court in support of the University of Texas in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin addressing the University of California's experience with race-neutral admissions practices after the enactment of Proposition 209; advised other universities on developing race-neutral admissions and scholarship annual processes.
  • Defended against federal preemption and constitutional challenges to university's reliance on state law entitling certain California high school graduates, including undocumented immigrant students, to pay in-state tuition in the state's public colleges and universities. See Martinez v. Regents of the University of California, 50 Cal. 4th 1277 (2010),  denied, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4299 (June 6, 2011). Advised other universities on similar issues involving in-state tuition benefits for undocumented alien students.
  • Defended university against class action seeking damages and injunctive relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 following a widely publicized confrontation between police and protesters in which university police officer deployed pepper spray. 
  • Defended university against federal grand jury subpoena of a doctoral candidate's research record developed through interviews in which the candidate had promised not to disclose such record pursuant to the human subject research protocol.
  • Obtained temporary restraining order and preliminary and permanent injunctions against animal research activist organization that threatened university employees; defeated SLAPP motion and won summary judgment for the university.
  • Defended large urban public school system in class action and federal enforcement action alleging violations of EEOA, Title VI and Title II, in provision of services to English Language Learners.
  • Defended large urban public school system in class action alleging violations of IDEA in the provision of special education and related services.
  • Filed amicus brief in support of public university challenging application of political conflict-of-interest statutes to university faculty.
  • Represented institution in connection with suspension by the Department of Justice following audit by the Department of Justice Inspector General.

Academic Medical Centers

  • Defended, and settled with no consideration paid to plaintiff class, class action seeking up to $700 million in statutory damages arising out of alleged disclosure of protected medical records by university medical center in violation of the state Confidentiality of Medical Information Act.
  • Represented university-affiliated research institution in USDA financial and administrative review of institutional use of grant funds to determine compliance with federal administrative requirements, cost principles, and implementing regulations. 
  • Defended major academic medical center in qui tam action brought under the federal False Claims Act; relator alleged that center's medical faculty failed to follow Medicare billing requirements in certain circumstances.
  • Represented academic medical centers regarding traditional reimbursement and commercial transaction issues in addition to matters involving scientific integrity (e.g., misconduct, disqualification), research objectivity (e.g., financial conflicts of interest), human subjects research and the Common Rule, FDA reporting obligations, the Shelby Amendment expansion of the Freedom of Information Act, HIPAA compliance, inventorship and technology transfer, and the NIH grants process.
  • Worked with research institutions to craft specific policies to comply with evolving privacy regulations and the Anti-Kickback Act and Stark law regulations. 
  • Provided antitrust guidance regarding collaborative activities among research centers, managed care center networks, protocols for clinical trial administration and reporting, and business and clinical affiliations with community hospitals and medical practices.
  • Represented public university in contract disputes with sponsors of clinical trials.
  • Counseled several academic centers in responding to whistleblower allegations and HHS investigations of billing practices in anesthesiology and neurosurgery programs.
  • Represented university in responding to third-party subpoenas in administrative proceeding for revocation of physician’s license.

Intellectual Property and Life Sciences

  • Won summary judgment on behalf of major research university in licensing dispute involving claims by a pharmaceutical company that university had improperly licensed rights to other compounds to a rival company.
  • Counseled universities as to unique intellectual property issues arising in grant agreements with the federal government and not-for-profit entities, and in sponsored research agreements with for-profit companies. 
  • Counseled universities in patent and trademark prosecution, negotiating licensing agreements, and revising intellectual property policies. 
  • Seconded intellectual property attorney to provide in-house support to major research university.
  • Advised various not-for-profit organizations on intellectual property issues related to sponsored research and negotiating grant agreements and multi-party collaboration agreements relating to the research.
  • Brought action on behalf of university to recover monies owed under the Exclusive License Agreement relating to sublicensing income.  
  • Evaluated license agreement and advised on possible legal claims.

Privacy and Cybersecurity

  • Counseled University system with respect to privacy issues throughout their contracts, including drafting vendor agreements to ensure PCI compliance, and updating standard templates to cover Confidentiality, Indemnification, Notification of Incidents and other security best practices. Negotiated a payment processing agreement with a large financial institution handling credit card transactions for the university.
  • Defended University against claims that it exposed confidential health information of patients and students against class action claims. Successfully negotiated a favorable settlement for client.
  • Represented university vendor that suffered a large security incident affecting institutions across the United States.  Worked with the universities to identify affected student population, understand notification obligations, and remediate the security issues.  Drafted follow up agreements tightening security language for protection of student personally identifiable information.
  • Assisted in investigating breach of cybersecurity and theft of intellectual property and reporting to law enforcement.
  • Counseled university health centers on HIPPA and FERPA compliance issues.

International Regulatory Compliance

  • Counseling universities with respect to export control issues in conducting joint international research projects associated with space exploration.
  • Preparation of guidance on scope of fundamental research exclusion from export controls and application in both research and classroom settings.
  • Preparation of advisory opinion requests concerning export control status of products developed through university and collaborative research projects.
  • Internal investigation and voluntary disclosures of potential export control violations involving university and research center projects.
  • Advised on preparation of petitions to Commerce and Customs and Border Protection for favorable import duty treatment for laser interferometer components.
  • Counseled institution with respect to preparation of commodity jurisdiction request and/or possible voluntary disclosure in relation to qualifying a commercial laser module for classified Air Force satellite.
  • Counseling clients with respect to the scope of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and related policies.

International Commercial Ventures

  • Acted as lead counsel in connection with a series of public-private partnership transactions with the Ministry of Health in the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to design and develop emergency shock trauma facilities in five hospitals, and subsequently, to manage and operate all such facilities; work includes all aspects of the corporate, commercial, government contracts, IP and regulatory issues related to this project.

Labor and Employment

  • Successful defense of wrongful termination and "whistleblower" claims brought by the former dean of a major medical school. Obtained favorable decision from administrative tribunal as well as summary judgment in court.
  • Successfully represented university in arbitration dispute with Union involving interpretation of collective bargaining agreement and related wage and back pay dispute. 
  • Negotiated favorable resolution of multiple-defendant race discrimination case filed against university in federal court.
  • Represented public and private institutions of higher education in OFCCP audits resulting in favorable Conciliation Agreements without any monetary remedies.
  • Represented university in OFCCP investigation of race discrimination and retaliation complaint brought by senior human resources official.
  • Litigated to successful resolution employment matters involving university faculty policies and procedures.
  • Secured favorable settlement of tenure denial case involving major private university.
  • Developed best practices guide and provided counseling for university affirmative action programs.
  • Devised and conducted university-wide EEO training tailored for human resources professionals, professors and administrative staff.
  • Represented public university in challenging jurisdiction of California Department of Industrial Relations to impose construction wage schedule for university development project.
  • Advised university regarding Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA) compliance issues presented by system-wide payroll conversion process.
  • Defended universities against employment discrimination claims brought by faculty and others. 

Renewable Energy

  • Represented two universities in selecting a supply of approximately 45MW of renewable energy in an RFP process and negotiating power purchase agreements with the developer of the selected facility.
  • Represented the seller in an agreement with Pennsylvania State University for the purchase of energy from a hydroelectric facility.
  • Represented the seller in an agreement with the University of Maryland Medical System for the purchase of energy from a solar facility.
  • Represented the developer in the construction and operation of a rooftop solar facility at the University of San Francisco.
  • Provided general energy advice related to the Regents of the University of California’s energy program.
  • Provided transactional and commercial advice related to the development of the Regents of the University of California’s biogas projects.
  • Provided transactional and commercial advice related to the Regents of the University of California’s energy program and procurement of solar energy.

Campus Crisis Management and Strategic Advising

  • Served as lead outside counsel for a major multi-campus public university in connection with all legal and governmental matters arising out of a much-publicized series of campus protests and other disturbances -- advised senior university officials, the Office of the General Counsel, and campus counsel regarding multiple proceedings and investigations; communicated with stakeholders, including students, faculty, campus police, and other groups; coordinated public relations; and defended university in litigation alleging use of excessive force by the campus police.

Investigations

  • Conducted internal investigation regarding whistleblower allegations that university violated the False Claims Act by mishandling government funds and provided misleading information in its proposals.
  • Conducted investigation on behalf of a major university system in several high-profile sexual assault cases involving university personnel.
  • Conducted investigation on behalf of large urban public school system of sexual assault incidents and related reporting requirements.
  • Conducted internal investigation on behalf of university in response to complaints of systemic discrimination with respect to alleged hiring and promotion practices, and counseled University in resolving complaints.
  • Conducted internal audits and investigations and represented academic medical center in connection with false claims and other alleged fraud investigations related to medical staff/faculty billings for professional services.
  • Assisted major research institution with internal investigation and response to multiple state and federal investigations, evaluation of self-reporting obligations, subcontract and prime contract issues, and remedial measures resulting from a hazardous waste incident.
  • Assisted public university with response to grand jury subpoenas relating to allegations that employee solicited kickbacks, improper gifts and gratuities, etc.
  • Assisted public university with response to warrant issued pursuant to Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Campaign Finance and Lobbying Law

  • Counseled private university regarding campaign finance and lobbying issues.
  • Defended public university against complaint to the Federal Election Commission alleging improper use of university resources in support of a candidate for Congressional office.
  • Advised private university regarding federal gift law issues.
  • Assisted private university in development of policy statements relating to various aspects of political law.

Claims Recovery

  • Recovered nearly $1 million in funds due to universities from settlements established as a result of price fixing in the liquid crystal display market.
  • Submitted claims on behalf of universities in pending matters involving electronics, financial services, pharmaceuticals, and food providers
  • Collected, organized and analyzed voluminous data to determine claims recovery opportunities in multiple pending matters. 
  • On-going counseling with respect to universities’ decision to opt out of class action settlements.

 

 

 

 

 

Contacts

See All Professionals

Insights

View All Insights

Insights

Speaking Engagement | 11.13.24

“Fall 2024 CLE Workshop: Sponsored Research and Technology Transfer, Opening Plenary,” National Association of College and University Attorneys (NACUA), Washington, D.C.

Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.17.24

Utah Bans DEI at Universities and in Public-Sector Employment, The Latest in a String of Similar Statewide Bans

Firm News | 2 min read | 04.30.24

Crowell Files Two Amicus Briefs in Important LGBTQ+ Rights Litigation

Publication | 01.09.24

Expect National Security Scrutiny Of Higher Ed To Continue
|

View All Insights

Professionals

View All Professionals

Insights

View All Insights