Former California State University chancellor dismissed from suit filed by Fresno student

Former California State University chancellor Joseph I. Castro has been dismissed from a lawsuit filed by a former Fresno State student alleging harassment and retaliation in violation of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act as well as an intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligence.

Castro and former Fresno State vice president of student affairs Frank Lamas were dropped from the suit, but the plaintiff is moving forward with an amended complaint that lists the CSU board of trustees as the defendant.

“The court’s decision to remove me from this case is a correct one,” said Castro, who resigned as chancellor in February 2022 amid a firestorm over his handling of sexual harassment allegations against Lamas when president at Fresno State.

The lawsuit, originally filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court by a Jane Doe in December 2022, alleges that the CSU “established a pattern of neglect and lack of concern regarding the safety of its students and employees” under Castro while president at Fresno State and that Castro “intentionally refused to step in and take action to thwart abusive and inappropriate behavior in his administration.”

In dismissing Castro from the suit, the court ruled that in serving as president at Fresno State and then as CSU chancellor, he was not the plaintiff’s employer but a supervisor, and that there are no allegations in the suit that he had taken any harassing actions against the plaintiff. At worst, the complaint alleges inaction on his part.

The court ruled that insufficient, stating “a supervisory employee is not personally liable under the FEHA as an aider and abettor of the harasser, for failing to take action to prevent the sexual harassment of a subordinate employee.”

Lamas was at the center of the furor at the university after a USA Today report detailed allegations of sexual harassment and an exit that included a $260,000 settlement and the promise of letters of recommendation toward future employment. An investigation into how Fresno State handed the case that was launched by the CSU board of trustees found the university did not consistently respond to harassment allegations, and that there were notice, record keeping and other deficiencies in its responses to allegations that started in 2014 and continued to 2019.

Action, inaction, and a pattern of neglect

Lamas has denied the allegations against him, though a Title IX investigation initiated by the university in 2020 found by a preponderance of the evidence that he had violated the CSU’s executive order 1096 by engaging in sexual harassment behaviors as well as other workplace misconduct.

“My wife and I are very pleased to see this lawsuit dismissed,” Lamas said. “It’s great to see justice has prevailed this time. As I’ve indicated from the beginning, I’m innocent of all the allegations that have been made against me from the start. I continue to maintain that the previous investigation was biased and unbalanced, but hope this ruling might be the beginning of clearing my name and reputation.”

The lawsuit is one of three from a former student, a former employee and an employee at Fresno State with the CSU and its board of trustees as a defendant, all of them alleging a mishandling of cases and investigations at the university.

In the amended complaint, the plaintiff alleges the CSU board established a pattern of neglect and a lack of concern regarding the safety of students at Fresno State under Castro, citing his refusal to take action to stem abusive and inappropriate behavior within his administration. That culture resulted in the neglect of student victims including the plaintiff, who reported a sexual assault on campus by a classmate that was ignored and mishandled by the university and its police department.

The CSU’s actions including those by Castro and Lamas constitute harassment and retaliation in violation of FEHA, according to the complaint.

While a student, the plaintiff also was employed as a tutor in a campus program.

Complaint moves forward with CSU board as defendant

The plaintiff, according to the suit, was assaulted by a classmate in February 2020 after meeting with him on campus, after class hours. The student wrapped his forearm around the plaintiff’s neck, pulling her back, and as the plaintiff tried to pull away the student placed his hands on the plaintiff’s breasts. The plaintiff continued to pull away and struggled to resist the assault, sustaining bruising around her neck area.

The following day, in a meeting with a Fresno State police officer, the plaintiff alleges she was asked a series of inappropriate questions including whether she had flirted with the student, what she was wearing at the time and whether she had done anything to provoke the student. After a meeting with the university’s Title IX director a no-contact order was issued, prohibiting the accused student from coming into contact with the plaintiff, but the following fall the student and plaintiff were enrolled in the same class.

The plaintiff in October 2021 requested a formal Title IX investigation through the Title IX process, but a claim of sexual misconduct was rejected.

The investigation findings, according to the complaint, did not conclude the incident never occurred and failed to address the university’s response to her sexual harassment claims including the actions of the campus police officer.