On July 24, 2007, three female student athletes at the University of California, Davis (UC Davis) filed this class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. The plaintiffs sued under Title IX of the Educational Amendments Act of 1972; 42 U.S.C. § 1983; and the Unruh Civil Rights Act of California. The plaintiffs, represented by attorneys from Equity Legal, Equal Rights Advocates, and private counsel, sought declaratory, injunctive and monetary relief, claiming that UC Davis engaged in sex discrimination, which deprived female athletes of an equal opportunity to participate in varsity athletics.
Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that the University employed a discriminatory process for establishing and maintaining varsity teams. During the 2005-2006 academic year, for example, females constituted 56% of the population of UC Davis, but only 50% of participants in varsity sports were female. The plaintiffs moved for, and were granted class status defined as "all present, prospective, and future women students at the UC Davis who seek to participate in and/or who are deterred from participating in intercollegiate athletics at the UC Davis."
On December 12, 2007, the Court (Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr.), dismissed the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law claims, leaving only the Title IX claim to be litigated. After two rounds of mediation, the parties decided they would settle this final claim.
On October 19, 2009, the Court approved a Settlement Agreement in which the University agreed to (1) form and fund a women's field hockey team set to start competition in 2009, (2) pay $110,000 to a non-profit organization aimed at the development of female athletes in the UC Davis club sports program, (3) report on and decrease the disparity between the percentage of women enrolled at UC Davis and the percentage of women participating in varsity sports, (4) pay each of the three class representatives $8,000 in damages, and (5) pay $460,000 in attorneys' fees and costs. The Settlement Agreement will remain in effect through the 2019-2020 academic year.
On October 20, 2009, the Court granted the joint motion for final approval of settlement and signed the stipulated judgment and order.
As of March 2017, there was nothign further on the docket; if there were any enforcement issues, they did not make their way into court. Joshua Arocho - 07/18/2012