Hearing Postponed for Titan Women’s Volleyball : Jurisprudence: Papers misplaced; judge delays hearing until March 12.

A preliminary injunction hearing to determine the immediate fate of the Cal State Fullerton women’s volleyball team has been postponed until March 12.

Titan Coach Jim Huffman and his team were in Superior Court Thursday, seeking the injunction to block the school’s January decision to drop the volleyball program. Huffman contends the move violates state education codes regarding sex discrimination.

But Judge Floyd Schenk said he couldn’t proceed with the case because several important court documents had been misplaced.

Documents for Superior Court cases at the West Orange County Municipal Courthouse must be filed in Santa Ana, and Kirk Boyd, the attorney representing the team, said he met all filing deadlines. But the papers apparently were lost en route to Westminster or misplaced in the court’s research department.

“It’s common--it happens all the time,” said Nancy Carlin, the attorney representing the university. “It’s just one of those things. But we were asking for a continuance to March 12, anyway, so it’s kind of ironic.”

A temporary restraining order, issued Feb. 3, allowing the team to use school facilities and practice under Huffman’s supervision, remains intact until the hearing, and Huffman will continue to be paid through that date.

Attorneys for Huffman and the team don’t believe the delay will hurt their case. If anything, they said, it might help, because it allows them to submit further evidence that they believe will strengthen their case.

Boyd this week received sworn declarations from Leanne Grotke, former Fullerton associate athletic director, who states the school’s decision to drop volleyball “is a giant leap in the wrong direction,” and Lt. Gov. Leo McCarthy, who said the move could be “contrary to the intent” of California education codes.

Grotke, who retired last fall, was part of a 1989-90 equity study that recommended steps for bringing Fullerton’s athletic program in compliance with state and federal (Title IX) gender equity laws.

The report concluded that the department should allocate 69% of its athletic budget for men’s sports and 31% for women’s sports. The recommendations were supposed to be implemented for the 1990-91 school year, but Grotke said, “by the fall of 1990, it was obvious that women’s sports were not getting 31% of the athletic budget.”

She continued: “Even before this decision, Fullerton was almost certainly violating state and federal gender equity laws. Dropping a priority sport like women’s volleyball could only increase pre-existing inequities and disparities.”