2020s Carleton Spotlight
2020s Carleton Spotlight
Embedded Files
Runaround, Sue
Runaround, Sue
“Jane Doe” has sued Carleton College, accusing them of negligence after she was assaulted by an instructor. Her complaint provides a look at what she went through before administrators finally took action.
Don Smith came to Carleton College in June 2019 to work as a data services assistant in the department of Institutional Research and Assessment (IRA). The department’s purview included fulfilling the requirements of the Jeanne Clery Act, a U.S. law mandating that colleges and universities collect campus crime data, support victims of violence, and publish the policies and procedures put in place to improve campus safety. Before leaving three years later, Smith had been promoted to assistant director of the department.Smith had graduated in 2009 from Carleton, where his thesis adviser had been Jay Levi, a tenured professor accused by at least eight students of sexual misconduct. Smith claimed to have won various accolades as a dancer, and when he got back to Carleton, he immediately contacted theater and dance chair Judith Howard to inquire about teaching a salsa course. She referred him to the PE department and told him about the college’s social dance club.In the fall of 2019 the social dance club invited Smith to teach a workshop, and in October he submitted a proposal to the PE department for a salsa course. He described himself as having “extensive competitive and professional experience” but no one at Carleton checked into his claims. Normally outside PE teachers are subject to a criminal background check, but as a college employee Smith had already been vetted.Doe was an incoming freshman–an 18-year-old foreign student–when she signed up for Smith’s workshop. Then in the winter term she took his Salsa I class, listed in the academic catalog for credit as a PE elective. In June 2024 she filed Jane Doe v. Carleton College in federal court, suing the college, according to the amended complaint she filed a few months later, “for its negligent conduct, including placing Smith in a position to abuse [her], failing to supervise Smith’s conduct, and retaining Smith despite his ongoing misconduct.” She says Smith groomed and sexually assaulted her and alleges that he “engaged in a campaign of systematically breaking down [her] barriers by acting as if he cared for her well-being and wanted to mentor her.”In its motion to dismiss, the college argues that “Carleton took swift and effective steps to protect Doe, stop Smith from making any further contact with Doe, and support Doe academically.” It further claims that “an institution may be directly liable only when it knowingly hires or continues to employ a dangerous person or fails to adequately respond after learning of harm.”It’s true that Doe initially withheld Smith’s name from administrators when she first approached them for help with her falling grades, saying she’d been assaulted by an instructor. She says she feared that if “she attempted to set boundaries or asked him to stop his inappropriate and sexually explicit conduct toward her, Smith would become resentful, retaliatory, angry, and possibly violent.” Carleton did eventually fire him, but the questions of when they learned of the harm he was doing and if they should have responded sooner to protect her may be up to the judge to decide. Trial was set for October 12, 2026, though the parties have agreed to try to negotiate a settlement on October 13.Doe had received extensive dance training back home, and while she learned salsa with Smith, he frequently singled her out for praise. He made friends with her as well, inviting her for “almost daily walks in the arboretum,” and advised her on how to deal with some college expenses, even paying for one of her textbooks. He lived near campus with his wife, another Carleton alum, and one time he invited Doe and two other students to dinner at their house. At the end of the winter term, Doe says, Smith left a note in her mailbox inviting her to train with him to become his co-teacher in future classes.The COVID pandemic disrupted the spring term, but during Doe’s sophomore year she and Smith practiced dancing in his administration office–at least ten times according to her complaint.In her junior year, Smith offered her $17.25 an hour to co-teach Salsa I and said she would be required to come to his home on weekends to practice and prep lessons. (Doe had been earning $11.75 at her campus job in the IT department.) According to the judge’s summary of the case filed on August 20, 2026, Smith’s supervisor didn’t know he had hired an assistant. Smith was paying her by personal check.Doe says she thought she’d be safe going to Smith’s house because not only was he married, he lived across the street from dean of students Carolyn Livingston, whom Doe says saw her coming and going several times. However, Doe says, she got uncomfortable with some of their conversations. Smith shared private information he’d obtained at work about faculty and other students, for instance, and claimed he had an ongoing sexual relationship with one of her former supervisors in the IT department. He also talked about his sex life and his capacity for violence: he said he had an open marriage and claimed that he was an instructor in BDSM. He told her he had been diagnosed as a sociopath and that his psychotherapist was required to check in on him, and that he had a collection of knives and guns. Doe herself saw a shotgun.Before the holiday break in December 2021, when Doe was 20, Doe had a flight to visit her family overseas, but she discovered there was a two-day gap between when her dorm closed and her departure. Smith invited her to stay at his house, and she accepted. On the second night, Smith took Doe to his basement to play Truth or Dare. According to her amended complaint, Smith said he’d been having sexual dreams about her. He told her “the option was there” if she ever wanted to have a relationship with him” and “bragged about his genitalia and sexual prowess, stating it would be wise to use the chemistry and attraction he believed they had to improve their dancing as it would help erase the teacher-student dynamic.” He told her he and his regular dance partner were “fuck buddies,” and said, “All serious dance partners fuck.”According to the judge’s summary, “Smith poured her a drink and after she finished it, Doe began to feel ‘weird and ill.’ Smith pressured her to have another. Doe’s memory of the rest of the night is hazy.” She knows she ran upstairs to vomit. When she woke up in bed the next morning she says, she didn’t know how she got there, and she discovered red marks, or bruises, around her neck. Doe did not report the incident to Carleton or the police at the time.”In January 2022 Doe turned 21, and Smith invited her to his house to celebrate her birthday with a “surprise”: He had arranged 21 pieces of colored paper face-down on a table, each labeled “reward” or “punishment.” He told Doe to turn them over one by one. Each one showed a reward or punishment. When she drew one saying “20 hits by hand,” Smith began aggressively spanking her over her pants. When the next item was again sexual in nature, Doe, who was becoming afraid for her safety, suggested they practice dancing instead. As soon as they began, according to the judge’s summary, “Smith bit Doe on her ear or shoulder, grabbed her arm and throat, and made sexually charged comments toward her once again.”A few days later, Doe saw her therapist and talked about the incident. They agreed the therapist would speak to associate dean of students Trey Williams. Then Doe went to see Williams and told him, without identifying Smith, that one of her instructors had attacked her when she was at his home. She said her mental health and studies were suffering, and she needed help making it through the term. Williams submitted a report to the Title IX office and also discussed the situation during a meeting of the CARE Team, a group of administrators from different offices who meet weekly.In other words, multiple Carleton administrators were made aware on February 9, 2022, that Doe was complaining of having been attacked by an instructor in his home. The CARE Team agreed that Williams would help her academically and Title IX coordinator Laura Riehle-Merrill would contact Doe about support resources. Riehle-Merrill emailed Doe to suggest a meeting, but Doe didn’t respond, and she didn’t follow up.Doe continued to assist Smith in class, and the harassment escalated. Her lawsuit enumerates multiple instances of inappropriate behavior, including in front of other students. She describes him forcibly kissing her at the end of dances and making comments “such as stating Jane had a ‘nice ass’ and that Jane had ‘energy that [said] “I probably won’t fuck you, but keep trying.”'”Doe failed one or two classes (depending on the source), and Smith offered to negotiate for her with the registrar, seeing if she could get a PE credit for the class she was co-teaching. He also proposed that together they do a one-on-one independent study in Latin dance and discussed this with dance department chair Judith Howard. She asked for a demonstration to help her decide if she should approve it, and afterward she wrote to Riehle-Merrill asking to meet, saying “there was ‘nothing drastic occurring’ but that she was aware of a situation that raised questions ‘about boundaries between students and teachers’ which ‘may or may not merit concern.” Riehle-Merrill, who already knew Doe had reported an attack from a teacher, now learned that Howard had found the relationship between Doe and her dance instructor concerning. Riehle-Merril saw Howard on March 4, 2022. Her meeting notes included the phrases “Judith feels this is grooming” and “Teacher ‘gets off on this.”Carleton’s motion to dismiss the suit says, “According to Doe, Riehle-Merrill advised Prof. Howard to take steps to ‘define boundaries’ between Smith and Doe,” and that “there is no allegation that Doe reported any concerns related to the independent study.”The judge’s summary continues: Howard met again with Smith and Doe and after conversation and some revision of the independent study proposal, she signed off on it and wrote to Riehle-Merrill to report the “good results,” identifying both Smith and Doe by name. She approved the course on April 12, and the next day, Doe was informed that she had been placed on “academic review”--to avoid suspension she’d have to pass all her remaining credits with a ‘C- or better and finish the term with a GPA of at least 2.0.Doe alleges that during the independent study, “Professor Howard was provided no supervision of Smith and was formally off-campus most of the term.” In the meantime, Doe says, her scholarly standing and her mental state continued to deteriorate.“During the 2022 spring term, Smith’s physical harassment became ‘near constant,’” according to the judge’s summary. “In April 2022, Doe received a letter purportedly from ‘Katie,’ Smith’s dance partner, encouraging Doe to have a sexual relationship with Smith. Doe suspected Smith wrote the letter himself, and when she did not mention it to him, he sent her a lengthy text message with the letter’s exact wording.”That month Doe’s boyfriend met with Riehle-Merrill on several occasions to share his concerns about “a friend’s” relationship with an instructor. He identified the man as a Carleton employee with a dual role, and asked about the process for reporting staff members. Doe herself went to see associate dean of students Cathy Carlson on April 22 about some missed COVID tests and while they met Doe told her she’d been attacked by a Carleton employee earlier in the term and asked if her academic probation could be lifted. Carlson agreed it could, considering the circumstances, and directed her to email Dean Livingston. Doe now wrote to Livingston with the same request. Livingston, who was and still is a member of Carleton’s Sexual Misconduct Support Team, asked Doe for another email “outlining what you want me to know that would be sufficient to change the outcome of the decision.” Doe says she didn’t send any more details. Instead she requested an in-person meeting, but she received no reply. On May 9 Doe finally decided to officially report the name of her assailant to Riehle-Merrill. Riehle-Merrill told her that since Smith was a staff member and not a professor, there was no need to follow the “long, elaborate, or disruptive” Title IX procedure. Of course, this decision kept the complaint out of Carleton’s Clery Act statistics as well. Riehle-Merrill called human resources and reported an employment matter.Smith continued teaching, and Doe was afraid that Smith, a self-described “dangerous sociopath,” might retaliate against her.According to Doe’s complaint, on May 10 Riehle-Merrill contacted a nonprofit women’s center for guidance on filing a Harassment Restraining Order (HRO), which she told Doe would be a “slam dunk.” Doe received word on May 12 that the HRO had been denied. On May 13 Riehle-Merrill reassured her that they could refile for an HRO and arranged a meeting with an attorney, but they learned that they could only refile for the restraining order if there had been an additional act of harassment since the first filing.On May 13, 2022, Smith was fired and banned from campus. When he’d applied to work at Carleton in data services, two former employers contacted by the hiring committee gave him positive reviews. However, it later emerged, according to the judge’s summary, that when he submitted the form for his background check, “Smith excluded purported prior employers that he had listed on his resume. At least one of those employers had no record of Smith ever working there.”The remainder of Smith’s salsa classes were canceled and his students were given full credit without explanation beyond “due to circumstances beyond our control.” Doe, the co-teacher, was left to field any questions from students. Doe got a note from Riehle-Merrill asking for discretion: “This is clearly a challenging and sensitive situation, we have taken every step to protect your privacy and hope that you will be thoughtful about how and with whom you share information and keep it as private as possible.”Doe knew Smith was banned but she didn’t know what that meant. She could try to avoid him, but without an HRO she had no legal recourse if he harassed or threatened her. Riehle-Merrill recommended that she seek guidance from the head of security, who told her that Smith was banned for one year from campus buildings, but not the streets and sidewalks or the arboretum, where he liked to walk every day.The ban could be renewed in one year, when she would be finishing her senior year, but she would have to be the one to go to security to renew it. She asked what she should do if she saw or was approached by Smith, and he advised her to “run.”Doe went home for the summer. She was able to make up her lost credits by staying up all night to take remote classes at U.S. colleges. She returned for her senior year and graduated on time in 2023.A year later, on June 17, she filed suit, and in the same month, Laura Riehle-Merrill left Carleton. The law firm that Carleton retains for sexual harassment cases, Somermeyer Sullivan, had spun off a consulting firm called Ballast to provide clients with training, investigations, interim staff, and other services related to Title IX. Ballast consultant Kari Hohn replaced Riehle-Merrill on an interim basis, and then in December 2025, Carleton promoted Nathan Riel-Elness from his role in student activities to take over as Title IX coordinator. ■“Jane Doe” has sued Carleton College, accusing them of negligence after she was assaulted by an instructor. Her complaint provides a look at what she went through before administrators finally took action.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse