Senior sues Tiger Inn, University

“My client was sexually assaulted. She required medical treatment and is seeking a remedy for what has been perpetrated against her,” Craig Hubert, the woman’s attorney, said in an interview over the weekend.

“But this case isn’t just about the dollar amounts and damages,” he added, “it’s about changing the bicker process as it exists at Tiger Inn, and it’s about accountability. Not just Tiger Inn’s accountability to Princeton University students but also seeking accountability from the University for Tiger Inn.”

The suit, a copy of which was not available over the weekend, would appear to mark the first time in recent years that a student has brought suit arguing that the eating clubs, not other students, bear direct responsibility for actions on the Street. In the past, actions have been restricted to local prosecutors bringing charges against the clubs and individual club officers.

The University received the complaint on March 5, University spokeswoman Cass Cliatt ’96 said in a statement to the Times of Trenton, which first reported news of the suit over the weekend.

“Our lawyers have reviewed it and they told us it’s essentially against Tiger Inn, which is an independent eating club, and the university was likely named to facilitate gathering of discovery (evidence) by the plaintiff’s attorney,” she said in the statement.

Cliatt and other University officials could not be reached for comment over the weekend. Officials at TI, including graduate board president Hap Cooper ’82 and president Phil Rosenberg ’08, also did not respond to requests seeking comment.

The alleged assault in this case occurred on Feb. 10, 2006, the night of TI pickups, and was investigated by the Mercer County Prosecutor’s office later that month. No charges were brought against the man at the time, the Times reported. He graduated from the University in 2007.

The woman’s name is being withheld in accordance with a court order issued by a New Jersey Superior Court judge that bars the public disclosure of her identity. The man who allegedly assaulted her has not been named in the complaint, and The Daily Princetonian is withholding his name because charges were never filed against him.

“If this lawsuit is indeed being filed (I have no knowledge of any suit at this time), it is nothing short of ludicrous,” the accused former student said in an e-mail to the Times. “The borough did not bring charges against me, and during the time that Princeton University was attempting to determine if any wrongdoing had occurred, the prospective plaintiff voluntarily sought out the administration and successfully convinced them that no wrongdoing had occurred.”

Hubert said the lawsuit was filed before the two-year statute of limitations expired on Feb. 10, 2008. His client waited almost two years to file the complaint because she and Hubert were investigating the possibility of reaching settlement terms with TI prior to instigating litigation, Hubert said.

“Tiger Inn left us no option but to pursue a lawsuit,” Hubert said. He declined to comment on the nature of the settlement terms discussed with the club.

The accused student, in his statement to the Times, said he believed the plaintiff was “maliciously bringing a frivolous suit in order to extort money from the University.”

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Hubert, however, stressed that monetary restitution was not the sole aim of the suit.

“My client isn’t doing this only to receive some sort of compensation for herself,” he said. “She’s looking for some sort of systemic change at the Tiger Inn such that other Princeton university students and other members of Tiger Inn are protected in the future.”

In particular, Hubert explained, he and his client were hoping to bring about changes that would address the club’s policy regarding the provision of alcohol.

“The Tiger Inn has allowed service of alcohol in an unrestricted, unbridled manner since several years prior to the assault upon my client,” he said. “On the particular night of the assault there was unchecked service of alcohol and free service to persons regardless of age and regardless to the amount that they had consumed.”

A slew of incidents in the 1980s and ’90s, including the serious injury of a student who climbed on top of the Dinky and touched a live power line and one student falling into a coma after a night of heavy drinking, prompted the University and the eating clubs to make extensive efforts to promote safer alcohol use on campus. Reforms included increased emphasis on training club officers, professional security guards at social events, the use of wristbands at many club events and restrictions placed on on-tap hours.

Recent years, however, have seen several reports of sexual incidents on the Street. In November 2005, Borough officials charged a male student with criminal sexual contact and lewdness in relation to an incident involving a female student at TI. That incident and several others prompted TI to go dry for two months in 2006.

“We really wanted to reevaluate the kind of behavior we encourage and we wanted to ensure that we could promote fun but safety also,” then-club president Kyle Morgan ’07 told the ‘Prince’ on April 13 of that year about the club’s decision to go dry.

He added then that the reforms were an attempt by the club “to do the right thing” and “encourag[e] different values, a different culture” of safety and respect on the Street.

The University was also partly responsible for the sexual assault of his client, Hubert said, because it allowed TI members to enter dormitories to recruit new members and to utilize the University e-mail system for recruiting purposes. Furthermore, the University had sufficient prior knowledge of misconduct at TI to be regulating activity at the club, Hubert said.

“The University certainly had knowledge through the police of numerous allegations as well as findings of improper behavior and criminal behavior that were being committed at Tiger Inn or certainly on their property,” Hubert said. “That knowledge that they had results in a duty to protect the Princeton University students who are being recruited from their dormitories to go to Tiger Inn.”

Normal commenting has been disabled for this story due to its sensitive nature, but The Daily Princetonian is hosting an open forum for the campus community to discuss and debate the broader issues it raises on The Prox blog.