Court Rejects Suit Against UC Over Rape Charge : Law: Appellate justices condemn the behavior but say school is not liable for students’ actions.

A state Court of Appeal refused Tuesday to allow a female ex-student to sue the University of California over her alleged rape by four UC Berkeley football players after a co-ed dormitory party in 1986.

The court rejected the former student’s novel claim that the university was negligent for, among other things, housing females on the same floor as males--particularly football players, who her attorneys alleged were unusually prone to group sex crimes.

While condemning the “outrageous and reprehensible conduct” by the players, the panel held 3 to 0 that the university may not be held liable for offenses committed by its students.

Through the years, campuses have moved away from intensive regulations on student conduct and have become “microcosms of society,” the court said.

“Unfortunately, sexually degrading conduct or violence in general--and violence against women in particular--are all too common within society at large,” Appellate Justice J. Clinton Peterson wrote for the court. “College administrators have a moral duty to help educate students in this respect, but they do not have a legal duty to respond in damages for student crimes.”

Pauline H. Tesler, a San Francisco attorney representing the former student, said an appeal to the state Supreme Court is being considered.

“We think it’s wrong that the university should randomly place together young men and women who don’t know each other, let them drink alcohol, and then say, ‘It’s not our fault’ when something like this happens,” Tesler said. “If that’s the law, the taxpayers of California ought to know about it.”

An attorney for the university, Peter W. Davis of Oakland, welcomed the ruling. “When young people come to college, it’s a time for maturation, and we can’t treat them like they were in kindergarten or high school and achieve the goals you have in a university setting,” he said.

Davis rejected the contention by lawyers for the former student that football players should not be permitted to commingle with others in a co-ed dorm. “Such a policy would condemn these athletes in advance and make them social pariahs,” he said.

The dorm incident, which created a campus furor, took place when the student was 17. She is now seeking a master’s degree at an out of state institution. Although university regulations prohibit use of alcohol by minors, the student and others at the party had been drinking, according to court documents.

The student said she was raped by one player in a darkened stairwell, then taken to a room where she was raped by three others. Alameda County authorities declined to prosecute the four players. In separate campus disciplinary proceedings, the four underwent counseling, performed community service and wrote letters of apology to the woman.

Attorneys for the woman brought a civil suit for damages against the university, contending that its officials were negligent in permitting co-ed housing and failing to take other steps that could have prevented the attack. Citing sociological studies and news reports, the suit said the university should have been aware that there is an inordinate likelihood of group sexual attacks by closely knit groups of men--such as football players or fraternity members.

Alameda Superior Court Judge Dawn B. Girard dismissed the suit. The appeal court upheld the dismissal, with Appellate Justice John Benson joining Peterson’s 12-page opinion and Justice J. Anthony Kline filing a separate concurring opinion.