The Journal Gazette, 600 W. Main St., Fort Wayne IN

INDIANAPOLIS – The Indiana Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a former IPFW professor cannot sue two students who filed complaints against the teacher under the school’s anti-harassment procedure.

“We hold complaints made by a current student pursuant to a university anti-harassment policy are protected by an absolute privilege and cannot serve as the basis for civil liability to a person who is the subject of the complaint,” the court found in a unanimous decision.

Gabe Keri had sued Virginia Hartman and Suzanne Swinehart in Allen Superior Court for alleged slander, libel and malicious interference with Keri’s employment contract. The trial court refused to grant summary judgment to the women, which would have ended the case.

The Indiana Supreme Court took the case on interlocutory appeal to address an issue of first impression in Indiana – or a subject that has not yet been ruled on.

According to the decision, officials at Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne informed Keri in April 2003 that his contract would not be renewed for the 2004-05 school year because of unsatisfactory teaching performance.

Apparently not knowing of this action, the two women – both graduate students in the School of Education – filed formal complaints with IPFW in May 2003 alleging sexual harassment by Keri.

The complaints were investigated by Elaine Blakemore, chair of the Department of Psychology, who interviewed other students and found “on balance … the majority of students … provided examples of experiences that were consistent with Ms. Hartman’s and Ms. Swinehart’s complaints.”

She specifically found that Keri created a hostile educational environment for students in the counselor education program and had harassed Hartman. Swinehart’s complaint wasn’t filed in a timely manner so Blakemore did not find that Keri specifically harassed Swinehart.

Blakemore recommended Keri be immediately removed from teaching. A three-person panel and Chancellor Michael Wartell agreed, and Keri was assigned to a 100 percent research position for the coming year and was not allowed in his campus office.

Keri sued Purdue University in federal court, but the court eventually granted summary judgment on behalf of the school. He also sued Hartman and Swinehart in state court.

“Hartman and Swinehart acted under the procedure Purdue established,” the Supreme Court opinion said.

“Protecting their complaints with anything less than an absolute privilege could chill some legitimate complaints for fear of retaliatory litigation.”

The ruling also noted that Purdue’s procedure is orderly and reasonably fair and requires discipline for those who file knowingly false or malicious complaints.

“If Keri has been unfairly treated, his complaint is against Purdue University as the architect and implementer of the policy and procedures, not the students who invoked the process,” the decision said.

Karen Orr, attorney for Swinehart and Hartman, said she and her clients were pleased with the decision.

Keri’s attorney did not return several messages left Tuesday.

nkelly@jg.net