7th Circuit reverses in girls' basketball discrimination complaint

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion Tuesday stating it believes the appellants in a discrimination claim have presented a genuine question of fact that merits further review.

In Amber Parker, et. al., v. Franklin Community School Corporation, et. al., No. 10-3595, Amber Parker – a former varsity girls’ basketball coach at Franklin County High School – filed the complaint against 14 Indiana public school corporations. Parker, whose daughter played on the Franklin team, claimed that the practice of holding boys’ games primarily on weekends and girls’ games primarily on weeknights was discriminatory.

During the 2009-2010 season, nearly 95 percent of the Franklin boys’ varsity games were played during “primetime” – nights that do not precede school days. In that same season, only 53 percent of girls’ games occurred during primetime. Parker’s complaint stated that because girls’ teams are relegated to weeknight play, the players have trouble keeping up with homework obligations, are less likely to have fan support, and generally feel that their accomplishments are less important than the boys’ teams.

The 7th Circuit agreed that Parker’s complaint may be actionable under Title IX of the Education Requirements of 1972, 20 U.S.C. Section 1681(a). It therefore vacated the entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendants that had been issued by the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division. It further vacated the District Court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ equal protection claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, on the basis of sovereign immunity, and remanded for proceedings consistent with its opinion.



Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. So men who think they are girls at heart can use the lady's potty? Usually the longer line is for the women's loo, so, the ladies may be the ones to experience temporary gender dysphoria, who knows? Is it ok to joke about his or is that hate? I may need a brainwash too, hey! I may just object to my own comment, later, if I get myself properly "oriented"

  2. Heritage, what Heritage? The New Age is dawning .... an experiment in disordered liberty and social fragmentation is upon us .... "Carmel City Council approved a human rights ordinance with a 4-3 vote Monday night after hearing about two hours of divided public testimony. The ordinance bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, among other traits. Council members Rick Sharp, Carol Schleif, Sue Finkam and Ron Carter voted in favor of it. The three council members opposing it—Luci Snyder, Kevin Rider and Eric Seidensticker—all said they were against any form of discrimination, but had issues with the wording and possible unintended consequences of the proposal." Kardashian is the new Black.

  3. Can anyone please tell me if anyone is appealing the law that certain sex offenders can't be on school property. How is somebody supposed to watch their children's sports games or graduations, this law needs revised such as sex offenders that are on school property must have another non-offender adult with them at all times while on school property. That they must go to the event and then leave directly afterwards. This is only going to hurt the children of the offenders and the father/ son mother/ daughter vice versa relationship. Please email me and let me know if there is a group that is appealing this for reasons other than voting and religion. Thank you.

  4. Should any attorney who argues against the abortion industry, or presents arguments based upon the Founders' concept of Higher Law, (like that marriage precedes the State) have to check in with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program for a mandatory mental health review? Some think so ... that could certainly cut down on cases such as this "cluttering up" the SCOTUS docket ... use JLAP to deny all uber conservative attorneys licenses and uber conservative representation will tank. If the ends justify the means, why not?

  5. Tell them sherry Mckay told you to call, they're trying to get all the people that have been wronged and held unlawfully to sign up on this class action lawsuit.