Phone: (213) 688-0460
Fax: (213) 624-1942
SCHOOLS WHERE WERKSMAN JACKSON HATHAWAY & QUINN HAVE SERVED AS ADVISORS FOR ACCUSED STUDENTS AND FACULTY MEMBERS
Mark Hathaway is admitted to practice in California, New York, and Washington, DC, and is certified as a Specialist in Taxation Law by the California State Bar. Mark’s experience in representing individuals and companies accused in complex financial crimes, government fraud, tax crimes, and related administrative, civil, and regulatory matters, helps him to navigate the complexities of Title IX sexual misconduct investigations, campus adjudication processes, and any necessary court litigation. Since stepping in to help a family friend at Occidental College in 2013, Mark has assisted dozens of students and faculty in Title IX misconduct cases, both complainants and accused students, with many cases resolved at the campus level. Mark represents numerous students in pending court appeals against colleges and universities, including several nationally-reported cases. Mr. Hathaway received his undergraduate degree from California State Polytechnic University and his J.D. from Southwestern University School of Law, Los Angeles, California. The Uncomfortable Truth About Campus Rape Policy (CLICK HERE) The Landmark Sexual Assault Case You’ve Probably Never Heard Of (CLICK HERE) Recent Successful Title IX Court Cases defended by Mark Hathaway: POMONA COLLEGE ORDERED TO PAY $130,000 ATTORNEY FEES TO STUDENT IN UNFAIR TITLE IX INVESTIGATION - JOHN DOE v. POMONA COLLEGE, CASE NO: BS163739
- On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Mary Strobel ordered Pomona College to pay $130,000 of attorneys’ fees to an accused student in a faulty Title IX administrative process. In setting aside Pomona College’s Title IX decision against the student, the court found that Pomona College had improperly told the complainant that she could answer questions in advance in writing, a procedure not found in Pomona College’s policies. The complainant also refused to attend the campus hearing, even though the hearing date was arranged to accommodate her schedule, so “Petitioner was unable to ask the [adjudicator] to pose questions to Roe at the hearing. It is entirely unclear whether the [adjudicator] would have made the same credibility determinations had Roe been questioned. The court finds that cumulatively, these conditions were prejudicial to Petitioner and denied him a fair hearing.” In ordering Pomona College to pay the student’s attorneys fees, Judge Strobel found that the accused student’s legal efforts “enforced the right to due process in academic sexual harassment investigations and proceedings” and “conferred a significant benefit on the general public or a large class of persons.” California Code of Civil Procedure sec. 1021.5 provides for an award of attorney’s fees when a lawsuit results in a significant public benefit, in this case the right of college and university students to due process in Title IX cases. The student was represented by Mark M. Hathaway, Werksman Jackson Hathaway & Quinn LLP. Pomona College was represented by Reed E. Schaper and Derek K. Ishikawa, Hirschfeld Kraemer LLP
- On March 19, 2018, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Tara M. Desautels ordered the University of California to pay attorney’s fees to an accused student in a faulty Title IX administrative process at the University of California, Santa Barbara (“UCSB”). John Doe, as the student is named in court documents, appealed his two-year suspension from the University to the Alameda Superior Court in December 2016. John Doe alleged that “UCSB’s administrative machinery, at every level, violated material provisions of the University’s Implementing Procedures. UCSB denied John Doe a fair hearing, and the findings are not supported by the evidence.” The court agreed and found that the University of California’s Title IX procedures “failed to comply with the Adjudicative Framework and the law,” such as allowing the unacceptable risk that the investigator was not unbiased. The court also found that “there is an unacceptable risk that the investigator [Brian Quillen] was not unbiased” and that the University “improperly permitted Quillen to base his evaluation of credibility on what Quillen understood to be the “trauma informed approach.” The court also noted that the UCSB appeal panel “conducted a substantial evidence review of the Quillen/OJA report instead of exercising its independent judgment in the review of the evidence.” In ordering the University of California to pay $31,097.85, part of John Doe’s request for $56,097.85 in legal fees, Judge Desautels found that John Doe’s efforts “enforced the right to due process in academic sexual harassment investigations and proceedings” and “conferred a significant benefit on the general public or a large class of persons.” California Code of Civil Procedure sec. 1021.5 provides for an award of attorney’s fees when a lawsuit results in a significant public benefit, in this case the right of more than 238,000 University of California students, and more than 190,000 faculty and staff, to due process in Title IX cases.
- In June of 2017, LA SIERRA UNIVERSITY ORDERED TO SET ASIDE TITLE IX SEXUAL MISCONDUCT ACTION AGAINST INTERNATIONAL STUDENT. Riverside, CA – Riverside Superior Court Judge Irma Poole Asberry has ordered La Sierra University to set aside its expulsion of an international student for violation of the University’s Title IX sexual misconduct policy, finding that the University’s disciplinary process unlawfully denied the male student a fair hearing and that the evidence did not support the University’s findings. On May 10, 2016, La Sierra University expelled the international student and revoked his student visa status without any hearing and without identifying any witnesses or disclosing any evidence. John Doe, as the student is identified in court records, sued the University and last July 2016, Riverside Superior Court Judge John D. Molloy ordered La Sierra University to stop the expulsion action pending a final ruling, which has now been entered against the University.
- In mid-August, 2017 Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert H. O’Brien barred the University of Southern California from expelling Bryce Dixon, a football player who was expelled on an allegation of sexual assault. The judge found that that the university’s sexual assault adjudication process was fundamentally unfair to accused students: http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/13/judge-stops-usc-from-expelling-football
- In July, 2017, Superior Court Judge Joel Pressman overturned a decision to suspend a University of California-San Diego student based on an allegation that consent for sex had not been obtained. Concluding “the hearing against petitioner was unfair,” Judge Pressman found serious procedural flaws in the university’s handling of the case: http://documents.latimes.com/uc-san-diego-sex-assault-case-ruling-doe-vs-regents-uc-san-diego/
June 20, 2018
The College FixREAD MORE
September 13, 2017
Los Angeles TimesREAD MORE
August 23, 2017
Los Angeles TimesREAD MORE
April 18, 2017