The Daily Orange is a nonprofit newsroom that receives no funding from Syracuse University. Consider donating today to support our mission.

Syracuse University’s chapter of the Alpha Chi Rho fraternity filed a lawsuit Tuesday claiming the university unfairly suspended the fraternity for an alleged racist verbal assault. 

SU suspended Alpha Chi Rho, also known as Crow, in November after the university determined that members and guests of the fraternity were involved in shouting a racial slur at a Black woman on College Place. Chancellor Kent Syverud said the university placed four members of the fraternity on interim suspension for their involvement in the incident. 

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in Onondaga County Supreme Court, also names Dolan Evanovich, senior vice president for enrollment and the student experience, as a defendant. 

Crow initially won an appeal in February that lifted the sanctions placed on the fraternity. Evanovich, who oversees the university’s conduct system, overturned the findings of SU’s appeal board on March 3.

Alpha Chi Rho fraternity lawsuit against Syracuse University by The Daily Orange on Scribd

Tuesday’s lawsuit alleges that SU violated its own policies and procedures during the conduct investigation and denied the fraternity due process. 

“We remain troubled by the rush to judgment by the Syracuse University administration,” said Jeffrey Turco, counsel to Alpha Chi Rho. “We are equally troubled that a top SU official specifically adopted findings that there was insufficient evidence to find AXP guilty, and yet then proceeded to overturn the decision.” 

Crow is requesting that SU reverse its decision finding the fraternity responsible for the violations.

“Consistent with University policy, we do not comment on pending litigation,” said Sarah Scalese, senior associate vice president for university communications.

SU’s University Conduct Board found on Dec. 19 that four members of Crow who had been suspended were not responsible for violating the Code of Student Conduct, letters sent to the students show. Turco does not represent the four students. 

Disciplinary proceedings continued against the fraternity as a whole. The results of the proceedings were not previously reported, as SU does not comment on internal conduct hearings. 

The conduct board sent a letter to Crow on Jan. 28 stating that the fraternity was not responsible for any conduct violations. The board was “unable to determine what exactly was said” to the student who made the allegations against the fraternity but found it likely that a guest of the fraternity “startled or offended” her and tried to look up her dress, the letter states. That guest was a student from Rutgers University.

After reviewing witness interviews and camera footage of the incident, the conduct board on Jan. 28 said it was not able to prove that any members of the fraternity or its guests said a racial slur, the conduct board ruling states. 

Though the victim alleged that several members of the group were chanting the N-word, none of her family members who were present reported hearing the chanting, the board said. Video footage of the incident shows a guest of the fraternity briefly approaching the woman’s car ahead of the rest of the group but does not show any reaction from the group, the board said. 

When the fraternity’s lawyer reached out to Sheriah Dixon, director of the Office of Student Rights and Responsibilities, to follow up about a paperwork technicality, Dixon claimed that the Jan. 28 conduct board finding was sent by another SU employee in error, emails between the lawyer and Dixon show. The conduct board was actually still deliberating, Dixon wrote. 

Dixon informed the fraternity on Feb. 11 that the conduct board had issued another opinion that now found Crow responsible for violating SU’s Code of Student Conduct. SU suspended the fraternity for one year.

The university argued that the person seen on camera approaching the woman at College Place and trying to look up her dress was an “informal guest” of Crow, making “the organization responsible for his actions and the impact they had on the Syracuse University community.” 

After the fraternity filed an appeal, the University Appeals Board on Feb. 21 overturned the conduct board’s decision and removed the sanctions placed Feb. 11 on Crow. The appeals board said it could not find any university policies that make an organization responsible for the actions of its guests during any event or gathering.

A week later, Evanovich announced he was rejecting the decision of the appeals board and finding the fraternity responsible for violating the Code of Student Conduct. Though the conduct board had been “unable to determine what exactly was said” to the woman, Evanovich decided that “it was more likely than not that the guest used a racial slur,” a March 3 letter from Evanovich to Alpha Chi Rho shows. 

The lawsuit argues that Evanovich’s “determination is contrary to the university’s policies and procedures.” Evanovich made an “unfounded allegation” that a guest of the fraternity made a racial slur that “served as the sole basis for holding the entire fraternity responsible for violating the Code of Student Conduct,” the suit argues.

Published on June 3, 2020 at 5:48 pm

Contact Michael: [email protected] | @MichaelSessa3