Boucher v. Syracuse University

Female students, including Jennifer Boucher (plaintiffs), sued Syracuse University (defendant) under Title IX, alleging discrimination in allocating varsity athletic opportunities and pointing specifically to the lack of women's varsity lacrosse and softball, while Syracuse funded 11 men's and 9 women's varsity teams. Syracuse announced it would add two women's teams to reach 11-and-11 parity; women's lacrosse began playing before trial, and softball was planned. Syracuse argued the case was moot. The trial court granted Syracuse summary judgment on the equal-treatment claims (and, without being asked, on a club-sports issue). The students appealed, arguing the case wasn't moot because they wanted to add a damages claim — though they didn't seek to amend for damages until three months after summary judgment was sought, and their attorney never raised damages at oral argument — and because they still sought class certification for prospective softball players and, more broadly, for all women who might want to be varsity athletes.

Whether a Title IX equal-treatment claim against a university becomes moot once the university has already taken steps to address the alleged inequality.