* The Clerk of Court is directed to amend the official caption as shown above.
1
10-3302-cv
Biediger v. Quinnipiac Univ.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
August Term, 2011
(Argued: January 31, 2012 Decided: August 7, 2012)
Docket No. 10-3302-cv
STEPHANIE BIEDIGER, KAYLA LAWLER, ERIN OVERDEVEST, KRISTEN CORINALDESI,
LOGAN RIKER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, ROBIN L.
SPARKS, individually,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
—v.—
QUINNIPIAC UNIVERSITY,
Defendant-Appellant.*
_________________
Before: WINTER, RAGGI, and CHIN, Circuit Judges.
______
Appeal from a permanent injunction issued by the United States District Court for the
District of Connecticut (Stefan R. Underhill, Judge) after a bench trial at which Quinnipiac
University was found to have violated Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 by
failing to afford equal participation opportunities in varsity sports to female students.
AFFIRMED.
Case: 10-3302 Document: 200-1 Page: 1 08/07/2012 684114 39
2
KRISTEN GALLES, Equity Legal, Alexandria, Virginia (Jonathan B. Orleans,
Alex V. Hernandez, Pullman & Comley, LLC, Bridgeport, Connecticut; David
McGuire, Sandra J. Staub, ACLU Foundation of Connecticut, Hartford,
Connecticut; Lenora M. Lapidus, Galen Sherwin, Women’s Rights Project,
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, New York, New York, on the
brief), for Plaintiffs-Appellees.
EDWARD A. BRILL (Susan D. Friedfel, Rebecca L. Berkebile, on the brief),
Proskauer Rose LLP, New York, New York, for Defendant-Appellant.
Dennis J. Dimsey, Holly A. Thomas, Attorneys, Thomas E. Perez, Assistant
Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Appellate
Section, Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae United States of America, in
support of Plaintiffs-Appellees.
Lauren B. Fletcher, Craig E. Davis, Jasmine S. McGhee, Wilmer Cutler
Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Boston, Massachusetts; Fatima Goss Graves,
Dina R. Lassow, Neena K. Chaudhry, National Women’s Law Center,
Washington, D.C., for Amici Curiae National Women’s Law Center; American
Association of University Women; Asian American Justice Center; Business
and Professional Women’s Foundation; California Women’s Law Center;
Connecticut Women’s Education and Legal Fund; Feminist Majority
Foundation; Legal Aid Society–Employment Law Center; Legal Voice;
National Association for Girls and Women in Sport; National Association of
Commissions for Women; National Association of Social Workers, National
and Connecticut Chapter; National Council of Jewish Women; National
Council of La Raza; National Education Association; National Partnership for
Women & Families; Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law;
Southwest Women’s Law Center; Women’s Law Center of Maryland;
Women’s Law Project; and Women’s Sports Foundation, in support of
Plaintiffs-Appellees.
Lawrence J. Joseph, Esq., Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae Eagle
Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, Inc., in support of Defendant-
Appellant.
Case: 10-3302 Document: 200-1 Page: 2 08/07/2012 684114 39
1 An athlete is “red-shirted” when he or she takes advantage of a National Collegiate
Athletic Association (“NCAA”) regulation permitting the athlete to remain on a team but not
to compete for a year without losing a year of athletic eligibility. An athlete may red-shirt
because of injury or to conserve a year’s eligibility while practicing and improving skills.
See Biediger v. Quinnipiac Univ., 728 F. Supp. 2d at 67 n.2 (citing 2009–10 NCAA Division
I Manual § 14.2.1 (requiring Division I athletes to complete four years of eligibility within
five years)).
3
REENA RAGGI, Circuit Judge:
Quinnipiac University appeals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) from a permanent
injunction ordered on July 22, 2010, by the United States District Court for the District of
Connecticut (Stefan R. Underhill, Judge), after a bench trial at which Quinnipiac was found
to have violated Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (“Title IX”) by failing to
afford equal participation opportunities in varsity sports to female students. See Biediger v.
Quinnipiac Univ., 728 F. Supp. 2d 62 (D. Conn. 2010). Quinnipiac argues that the
injunction, which prohibits any such future discrimination, should be vacated because it is
based on a Title IX ruling infected by errors in counting the varsity athletic participation
opportunities afforded Quinnipiac’s female students in the 2009–10 school year.
Specifically, Quinnipiac faults the district court for excluding from its count of the total
athletic participation opportunities afforded female students: (1) 11 roster positions on the
women’s indoor and outdoor track and field teams, held by members of Quinnipiac’s
women’s cross-country team who were required to join the track teams even though they
were unable to compete in 2009–10 because they were injured or “red-shirted”;1 and (2) all
30 roster positions on Quinnipiac’s nascent women’s competitive cheerleading team, based
Case: 10-3302 Document: 200-1 Page: 3 08/07/2012 684114 39
