Officials from the Diocese of Youngstown and Ursuline High School filed a formal response denying allegations that they ignored the persistent bullying of a gay freshman. The legal filing comes after a student and his grandmother sued the school, claiming football players harassed the teenager while administrators did nothing to stop it.

The lawsuit, filed by a student identified only as Grandson Doe, alleges that several football players ridiculed him daily during the 2023-24 school year. The complaint states that players used slurs in front of teachers and that one teacher even mocked the student for wearing makeup. The family claims the school protected the athletes to preserve the success of the football team.

In a 28-page answer filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, the Diocese, the school, and Assistant Principal Margaret Damore disputed nearly every major claim. The defendants stated that the school investigated concerns reported by the grandmother in early 2024, but described those reports as vague and unspecific.

The school officials claimed that when they interviewed the student as part of their investigation, he denied that any issues were occurring on or off campus. They further stated that they have no records of the student ever reporting misconduct or bullying to teachers or staff.

While the school admitted the student wore makeup, they denied that he ever reported being harassed for it. They also rejected the claim that the student withdrew from the school to escape a hostile environment. Instead, the defendants stated the student was asked to leave for academic reasons.

The defense acknowledged that the student’s grades were poor throughout the year but argued that the school provided extensive help. This included assigning him a counselor and setting up tutoring sessions. They also noted the student became ineligible to participate in track because of his grades.

The original lawsuit includes a claim under Title IX, a federal law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in schools that receive federal money. The family argued that the harassment was based on sex stereotyping because the student did not conform to traditional masculine traits.

The school’s attorneys raised several defenses against the Title IX claim. They argued that the school is a religious organization and should be exempt from Title IX in certain contexts, such as policies regarding gender-specific dress codes. They also argued that any alleged harassment did not happen on school grounds and that administrators had no actual knowledge of the behavior.

The response also addressed an incident at a local McDonald’s mentioned in the lawsuit. The grandmother claimed she saw four football players laughing at her grandson and that one used profanity toward her. The school officials stated these were off-campus issues and reiterated that the student denied any problems when asked by administrators.

Attorneys for the Diocese asked the court to dismiss the case entirely. They argued the student's injuries were caused by his own conduct or by third parties outside of the school's control. They also stated that the school acted in good faith and followed its own safety policies.

The case is currently assigned to Judge Benita Y. Pearson and Magistrate Judge Carmen E. Henderson. The defendants have requested a trial by jury to resolve the matter.