CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
JOHN DOE,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI; ANIESHA MITCHELL; JUAN GUARDIA,
Defendants-Appellants.
   No. 16-4693
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati.
No. 1:16-cv-00987—Michael R. Barrett, District Judge.
Argued: August 1, 2017
Decided and Filed: September 25, 2017
Before: CLAY, GRIFFIN, and THAPAR, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

On September 6, 2015, University of Cincinnati students John Doe and Jane Roe1 engaged in sex at John Doe’s apartment. John contends that the sex was consensual; Jane claims it was not. No physical evidence supports either student’s version.

After considerable delay, defendant University of Cincinnati (“UC”) held a disciplinary hearing on Jane Roe’s sexual assault charges against graduate student John Doe. Despite Jane Roe’s failure to appear at the hearing, the University found John Doe “responsible” for sexually assaulting Roe based upon her previous hearsay statements to investigators. Thereafter, UC suspended John Doe for two years—reduced to one year after an administrative appeal.

Plaintiff Doe appealed his suspension to the district court, arguing that the complete denial of his right to confront his accuser violated his due process right to a fair hearing. In granting a preliminary injunction against Doe’s suspension, the district court found a strong likelihood that John Doe would prevail on his constitutional claim. So do we, and for the reasons stated herein, affirm the order of the district court.