Title IX Not Entitled to Emotional Distress Damages

June 7, 2023

For the first time in Massachusetts, a federal judge has ruled that emotional distress damages are unavailable to a student bringing a Title IX claim against their school.



Here, a student at North Andover High School alleged that another student had sexually assaulted them. It was the student’s claim that the school officials failed to adequately investigate and address the claims of sexual assault.


The School argued in response that emotional distress damages under Title IX were discontinued under the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C.


In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that plaintiffs could not recover damages for emotional distress under the Rehabilitation Act of 1972 or the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The court based its finding off of the notion that because such damages are not typically available in contract law, recipients of federal funding lack clear notice that they might face such a remedy under spending clause statutes such as the Rehabilitation Act and the ACA. The School argued that the same applies to Title IX claims.


The U.S. District Court Judge agreed with the School.


“Although the Supreme Court’s holding applies directly only to the Rehabilitation Act and the ACA, the opinion discussed the four Spending Clause Acts, including Title IX,” the judge wrote. “Finding no basis to treat Title IX differently than the Rehabilitation Act and the ACA, the court concludes that Cummings precludes damages for emotional distress under Title IX.”


The U.S. District Court may have diminished the student’s ability to recover emotional distress damages, but the Court has allowed the Title IX claims to move forward and the Student may pursue other avenues of damages to recover.


If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

December 5, 2025
Our attorneys successfully obtained summary judgment in favor of the Defendant from the Massachusetts Appeals Court in a Wage Act and contract dispute. The Complainant alleged entitlement to a substantial variable compensation award following resignation. We demonstrated that the compensation plan made such awards discretionary and contingent on continued employment at the time of payout. The Appeals Court agreed, finding that the award did not constitute wages under the Wage Act and that the Defendant acted lawfully in denying payment. All claims were dismissed in their entirety.
By The Royal Law Firm November 5, 2025
Attorney Amy Royal has once again been selected as a Super Lawyer ! As published by Super Lawyers Amy B. Royal is a top-rated attorney, with her firm headquartered in Springfield, Massachusetts. Providing legal representation in the New England states and New York, for a variety of different issues, Amy Royal was selected to Super Lawyers for 2014 - 2016, 2019 - 2025. Attorneys like Amy B. Royal are recognized by their peers for their outstanding work and commitment to the spirit of the legal profession. Their knowledge of the law, professional work ethic, and advocacy on behalf of their clients allow them to stand out among other attorneys in the field.