Former San Diego state student sues over hazing allegations

[ad_1]

A San Diego State University graduate filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in San Diego, claiming the school falsely accused him of hazing while he was member of Phi Gamma Delta, a controversial fraternity that was shut down last year.

The California State University system is also named as a defendant in the lawsuit, which was filed on December 28 on behalf of John Lema, who graduated from SDSU in May.

The trial focuses in part on the 2019-2020 academic year, when Lema was a member of Phi Gamma Delta and the fraternity was in turmoil following the death of one of his wages, the freshman. Dylan Hernandez.

In November 2019, Hernandez got drunk during one of the fraternity events, according to campus police. Investigators estimated his blood alcohol level to be around 0.23 when he left the party. A person cannot legally drive a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol level of 0.08 or greater.

Hernandez returned to his campus dormitory and climbed into the top basket of his bunk bed. He later fell from the bunk and hit his head, suffering a fatal injury.

The university launched a broad investigation into the fraternity’s activities and discovered that Phi Gamma Delta was in violation of the rules of aiding and abetting, alcohol, hazing, or conspiracy for Haze, health and safety, illegal drugs and violations of the conduct procedures of student organizations. SDSU kicked the fraternity out of campus life for 10 years.

The international headquarters of Phi Gamma Deltas announced around the same time that it had indefinitely suspended the charter of fraternities.

The lawsuit says that Lema received an email from SDSU in July 2020 that says, during the 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 academic years, you engaged and conspired to engage in hazing activities that put endangered health and safety from California State University. students.

In addition, it appears that you provided alcohol to minors, physically assaulted members of the campus community, interfered with the proper conduct of a student disciplinary process, attempted to influence the impartiality of any participant in a dispute. student disciplinary matter and encouraged, authorized or assisted another to do any act that might subject them to discipline.

Lema said he didn’t break any of the university’s rules and had little involvement in the fraternity, even though he was a member. But SDSU has suspended Lemas’s graduation ceremony, according to the lawsuit.

He retained the services of a lawyer the following month and began to dispute the allegations. The lawsuit says SDSU proposed a settlement agreement on the disciplinary charges in November. The proposed deal said Lema had done everything from forcing others to consume alcohol to bullying and boating.

The settlement agreement did not contain a single piece of documentary evidence that corroborates Lemas’ liability to them, the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit also said the agreement provided for Lema’s suspension from the SDSU until November 4, 2022, which would appear on his transcript. He should also have attended and paid for consultations.

The lawsuit further says, after substantial pressure was brought to bear on SDSU by the undersigned lawyer (Keith Altman), all disciplinary proceedings against Lema were dropped, and [he] was able to graduate in May 2021.

However, the ordeal inflicted on Lema by the accused caused Lema immense suffering and emotional hardship. The defendants’ actions …. also forced Lema to spend a significant amount of money on attorney fees to obtain the degree he had worked so hard for.

Lemas’ attorney, Keith Altman of Farmington Hills, Mich., Could not be reached for comment.

In a statement to the Union-Tribune, the university said: As this situation involves active litigation, SDSU cannot discuss the matter or any specific details.

The school added that students alleged to have violated the SDSU Student Code of Conduct are given due process, which includes receiving notice of alleged violations and several opportunities to respond, request or provide information, among additional rights.

Upon receipt of an allegation, all students are presumed not responsible for violating the Code of Student Conduct, and findings of responsibility are only made when a standard of preponderance of evidence is met after a thorough investigation. .

A CSU official referred to SDSU on Tuesday for comment on the matter.

[ad_2]