USC isn’t liable for frat party injury, appeal court rules

The University of Southern California cannot be held liable for injuries sustained by a young woman who partied at one of the school's fraternity houses, a state Court of Appeal panel recently ruled in a decision further clarifying when colleges are responsible for student-related behavior.

The 35-page opinion, which came down in November but was published Wednesday, articulates that USC had no duty to protect members of the public from events that occur during off-campus social gatherings.

"A college has little control over such non-curricular, off-campus activities, and it would be unrealistic for students and their guests to rely on the college for protection in those settings," wrote Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Gary I. Micon, who sat on a 2nd District Court of Appeal panel deciding the case.

Justices Nora Manella and Audrey B. Collins joined the decision.

Carson Barenborg sued the university in 2016 in relation to an injury she sustained while attending a party on USC's off-campus Greek Row three years earlier.

Then a 19-year-old student at Loyola Marymount University, Barenborg, toppled off a table on which she was dancing with several other students. The plaintiff, who was inebriated and high on cocaine at a party hosted by the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity, said she was pushed. Her injuries were "significant," according to the court opinion.

Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Ruth Ann Kwan rejected a summary judgment request filed by USC, saying she could not "determine that, as a matter of law," the school did not owe Barenborg a duty of care.

"There are triable issues of material fact as to the existence of a special relationship," Kwan wrote.

But in November, the Court of Appeal issued a writ of mandate vacating her decision. University of Southern California v. Superior Court (Barenborg), 2018 DJDAR 12090.

The ruling comes on the heels of the state Supreme Court's March opinion establishing that leaders at UCLA owed a duty of care to a student stabbed by a classmate the school knew was mentally ill. Regents of the University of California v. Superior Court , 4 Cal. 5th 607 (2018).

Micon wrote that, unlike in the Regents case, USC did not have a special relationship with Barenborg, who was not a student at the school. He noted that USC did not control the property where Barenborg fell and rejected her argument that the school had a relationship with the fraternity that required it to protect the group's guests.

Dean E. Dennis, a partner at Hill, Farrer & Burrill LLP who represented USC, did not respond to a request for comment Thursday.

A woman at Girardi Keese who identified herself over the phone as an assistant to Barenborg's attorney, Amanda L. McClintock, said the firm had "no comment" on the ruling.

According to the opinion, Barenborg filed lawsuits against the woman she says pushed her and the fraternity.