Ursuline High School Faces Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit Over Football Team Hazing Allegations

Ursuline High School in Youngstown, Ohio faces a comprehensive federal civil rights lawsuit alleging systematic hazing, physical and sexual assault within the football program, and administrative cover-up. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, presents 32 separate legal claims against the school, administrators, coaches, and student players, highlighting what attorneys describe as a “long-standing culture of hazing” that school officials allegedly ignored and concealed.

This federal litigation represents one of the most serious legal challenges facing an Ohio high school athletics program in recent years, with implications extending far beyond Youngstown to national conversations about student safety, institutional accountability, and civil rights protections in educational settings.

Breaking News: Federal Lawsuit Details

Case Filing Information

Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio Filing Date: September 2, 2025 (Tuesday) Total Claims: 32 separate legal allegations Legal Basis: Federal civil rights violations, institutional negligence, and systematic cover-up

Primary Defendants Named

Institutional Defendants:

Ursuline High School
Principal Matthew Sammartino
Football coaching staff
Administrative officials

Individual Student Defendants: Multiple Ursuline High School football players (names protected due to minor status)

The comprehensive defendant list demonstrates the lawsuit’s allegation that hazing violations occurred at multiple institutional levels with knowledge and participation from both students and adults.

Detailed Allegations and Legal Claims

Timeline of Alleged Incidents

The lawsuit alleges that the hazing of a soon-to-be freshman player and others took place on an out-of-state trip in June 2025 over several days when the players visited Florida, Alabama and Tennessee. This multi-state travel component adds federal jurisdiction elements to the case and potentially increases legal exposure for defendants.

Nature of Alleged Hazing Activities

The lawsuit claims that Son was not the only player to be hazed on the trip, and that others were forced to endure physical and sexual attacks, “degradation,” and insults. The allegations extend beyond a single victim, suggesting systematic abuse affecting multiple students during the athletic team travel.

According to the suit, the players allegedly held the student down, stripped him, humiliated him in what the lawsuit characterizes as criminal activity occurring under the supervision and knowledge of adult team leadership.

Institutional Response Allegations

Mother claims that when she brought the attacks to the attention of Reardon and other school officials, the institution allegedly failed to take appropriate corrective action or properly investigate the reported incidents.

The lawsuit alleges that school administrators were made aware of the hazing activities but failed to protect students from ongoing abuse, potentially creating institutional liability for civil rights violations.

Ursuline High School Faces Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit Over Football Team Hazing Allegations - 32 Legal Claims Filed

Legal Framework and Federal Jurisdiction

Civil Rights Violations Under Federal Law

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, alleges that the school, its officials, and coaches failed to protect students from a long-standing culture of hazing within the football program.

The federal civil rights claims likely invoke:

Section 1983 Claims: Violations of constitutional rights under color of state authority
Title IX Violations: Gender-based discrimination and harassment in educational programs
Equal Protection Claims: Denial of equal protection under the law
Due Process Violations: Failure to provide adequate procedural protections

Criminal Activity Allegations

It alleges that several football players engaged in criminal activity, including hazing, which may trigger parallel criminal investigations and prosecutions independent of the civil lawsuit.

The criminal activity allegations could result in:

Juvenile court proceedings against student perpetrators
Adult criminal charges for any participants over 18
Federal criminal investigations for interstate crimes
Enhanced civil damages based on criminal conduct

Institutional Negligence and Supervision Failures

Administrative Accountability Claims

The lawsuit targets multiple levels of institutional leadership, suggesting systematic failures in:

Student supervision during travel
Background screening of coaching staff
Response to reported incidents
Implementation of anti-hazing policies
Protection of vulnerable students

Coaching Staff Liability

The suit states that Ursuline should have conducted a background check before hiring McGlynn, and says if they did, they were negligent for hiring him. This allegation suggests potential negligent hiring claims against specific coaching personnel.

The coaching liability allegations may include:

Failure to supervise student activities
Negligent hiring and retention practices
Inadequate training on hazing prevention
Failure to report known abuse incidents
Creating environments conducive to hazing

Legal Implications and Potential Outcomes

Damages and Compensation Framework

The 32-claim lawsuit structure suggests potential recovery across multiple legal theories:

Economic Damages:

Medical and psychological treatment costs
Educational disruption and tutoring expenses
Long-term counseling and therapy needs

Non-Economic Damages:

Pain and suffering compensation
Emotional distress and trauma recovery
Loss of educational opportunities and experiences
Reputational harm and social stigma

Punitive Damages:

Institutional accountability for systematic failures
Deterrent awards to prevent future incidents
Enhanced damages for cover-up allegations

Injunctive Relief Possibilities

The federal court may order:

Mandatory anti-hazing policy implementation
Enhanced supervision requirements for athletic programs
Independent monitoring of school athletics
Comprehensive staff training on abuse prevention
Student safety reporting mechanisms

Broader Educational and Legal Context

National Hazing Prevention Movement

This case occurs within broader national efforts to address hazing in educational institutions:

Federal legislative initiatives targeting hazing prevention
State law enhancements increasing criminal penalties
Institutional policy reforms across school districts
Civil rights enforcement by federal agencies

Ohio School District Implications

The Ursuline lawsuit may influence:

Statewide policy reviews of athletic program oversight
Insurance coverage evaluations for school districts
Background screening enhancements for athletic staff
Travel supervision protocols for student activities

Student Safety and Civil Rights Protections

Federal Civil Rights Framework

The lawsuit invokes fundamental civil rights protections:

Educational access and safety rights
Protection from gender-based discrimination
Equal treatment under institutional policies
Due process in disciplinary proceedings

Institutional Obligations

Educational institutions must provide:

Safe learning environments free from harassment
Adequate supervision of student activities
Prompt response to reported abuse incidents
Equal protection for all students regardless of status

Legal Strategy and Representation

Plaintiff Legal Representation

The case is being handled by experienced civil rights attorneys specializing in educational institutional liability and student protection cases.

Defense Strategy Considerations

Institutional defendants likely will focus on:

Challenging federal jurisdiction arguments
Disputing institutional knowledge of alleged incidents
Questioning supervision standards and expectations
Minimizing damages through comparative fault theories

Current Status and Procedural Timeline

Immediate Legal Proceedings

Recent Developments:

The suit, filed Tuesday in the U.S. District Court represents the initial phase of federal litigation
Discovery proceedings will likely begin within 30-60 days
Defendant responses and motions due within federal court timeframes

Expected Timeline

Next 90 Days:

Defendant responses and potential motions to dismiss
Initial discovery scheduling conferences
Preliminary injunction hearings if requested

6-12 Months:

Extensive discovery proceedings including depositions
Expert witness identification and reports
Settlement negotiation opportunities

12-24 Months:

Trial preparation and pre-trial motions
Potential resolution through settlement or trial

Community and Stakeholder Impact

Ursuline High School Response

The school has not yet issued comprehensive public statements addressing the specific allegations in the federal lawsuit. Institutional responses typically include:

Legal counsel engagement and defense strategy development
Internal policy reviews and potential reforms
Communication with parents, students, and community members
Cooperation with any criminal investigations

Family and Victim Considerations

“This case is about accountability. No family should have to endure the trauma this family suffered at the hands of other students and then” face institutional indifference, according to legal representatives.

The litigation provides:

Formal legal recourse for alleged violations
Public accountability for institutional failures
Financial compensation for damages suffered
Systematic reforms to prevent future incidents

Frequently Asked Questions

What specific federal laws does this lawsuit invoke?

The federal civil rights lawsuit likely invokes Section 1983 civil rights violations, Title IX gender discrimination claims, and constitutional due process and equal protection violations. The multi-state nature of the alleged hazing incidents provides federal jurisdiction.

How does this differ from typical hazing incidents?

This case involves 32 separate legal claims against both institutional and individual defendants, allegations of systematic cover-up by school officials, and criminal activity occurring across multiple states during official school travel.

What potential outcomes could result from this lawsuit?

Potential outcomes include monetary damages for affected students, injunctive relief requiring policy changes, enhanced supervision requirements, and possible criminal prosecutions of individual perpetrators.

Can other affected students join this lawsuit?

Given that the lawsuit alleges multiple students were hazed, additional victims may potentially join the litigation as plaintiffs or file separate but related claims within applicable statute of limitations periods.

What evidence will be crucial in this case?

Key evidence likely includes documentation of the multi-state trip, communications between school officials about reported incidents, institutional policies on hazing prevention, and medical/psychological records documenting harm to affected students.

How long will this legal process take?

Federal civil rights cases typically take 12-24 months to resolve through trial, though settlement negotiations may occur earlier. The complexity of 32 legal claims and multiple defendants may extend proceedings.

What protections exist for student victims during litigation?

Federal courts provide protective orders for sensitive information, confidentiality protections for minor victims, and procedural safeguards to minimize additional trauma during legal proceedings.

Legal Precedent and Implications

Educational Institution Liability Standards

This case may establish important precedents for:

Institutional supervision obligations during student travel
Response requirements for reported hazing incidents
Federal court jurisdiction over school athletic programs
Damages standards for systematic civil rights violations

Athletic Program Oversight Requirements

The litigation may influence:

Background screening standards for coaching staff
Anti-hazing policy implementation across school districts
Student activity supervision protocols during travel
Reporting requirements for abuse incidents

National Context and Reform Implications

Federal Educational Policy Considerations

This lawsuit occurs within broader federal initiatives addressing:

Student safety in educational institutions
Civil rights enforcement in schools
Athletic program accountability standards
Institutional response to abuse reports

State Legislative Reform Potential

The case may influence Ohio state legislation regarding:

Enhanced criminal penalties for educational hazing
Mandatory reporting requirements for school officials
Athletic program oversight standards
Student protection policy mandates

Expert Legal Analysis

Civil Rights Violation Assessment

The 32-claim structure suggests a comprehensive legal strategy addressing multiple aspects of alleged institutional failure:

Individual constitutional violations affecting specific students
Systematic policy failures creating hazardous environments
Administrative negligence in supervision and response
Criminal activity facilitation through inadequate oversight

Institutional Liability Exposure

Educational institutions face significant liability exposure when:

Administrative officials have actual knowledge of ongoing abuse
Systematic failures create environments conducive to harassment
Inadequate policies fail to protect vulnerable students
Improper responses to reported incidents compound initial harm

Conclusion and Ongoing Developments

The federal civil rights lawsuit against Ursuline High School represents a landmark case in educational institution accountability, student safety protection, and athletic program oversight. With 32 separate legal claims targeting both institutional and individual defendants, the litigation highlights the serious legal consequences schools face when failing to protect students from hazing and abuse.

In 2025 how is this kind of hazing still going on? I hope this kid gets paid well. He went through 9 days of hell – a sentiment reflecting broader community outrage and support for accountability measures.

Key Developments to Monitor:

Federal court proceedings and initial defendant responses
Potential criminal investigations by state and federal authorities
Institutional policy reforms at Ursuline and other Ohio schools
Settlement negotiations and potential resolution discussions
Legislative responses addressing educational hazing prevention

The case serves as a critical reminder that educational institutions must prioritize student safety over athletic program interests and face serious legal consequences when failing to protect vulnerable students from abuse and harassment.

This litigation will likely influence national conversations about student athlete protection, institutional accountability standards, and the role of federal civil rights enforcement in educational settings. The comprehensive nature of the legal claims suggests this case may establish important precedents for future educational institution liability cases.

For affected families, students, and communities, this lawsuit represents both a pursuit of justice for alleged violations and an opportunity to drive systematic reforms protecting future students from similar harm.

This article provides general information about the Ursuline High School federal lawsuit and should not be considered specific legal advice. The case remains active in federal court with ongoing legal proceedings. Consult with qualified attorneys for guidance on specific legal matters related to educational institution liability or civil rights violations.

About the Author

Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah

Table of Contents