Full Breakdown
Federal Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Against Indiana University Over Alleged Sexual Abuse
4/2/2026, 9:58:41 AM
Lawsuit Dismissal Details
A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by former Indiana University basketball players against the university and former head athletic trainer Tim Garl, alleging sexual abuse by former team physician Dr. Bradford Bomba. The lawsuit, which was filed in October 2024, claimed that Bomba conducted medically unnecessary rectal examinations on players during the 1980s and 1990s, constituting sexual misconduct. U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt ruled that the players' claims were barred by Indiana's two-year statute of limitations, which had expired.
Background of the Allegations
The plaintiffs, including Haris Mujezinovic and Charlie Miller, alleged that university officials, including the late head coach Bobby Knight, were aware of Bomba's conduct but failed to take action. The lawsuit argued that the players only realized the nature of Bomba's actions as sexual abuse under Title IX in 2024. However, Judge Pratt noted that the players had previously acknowledged that the alleged misconduct was "widely known among university staff," undermining their argument regarding the statute of limitations.
Court's Rationale
In her ruling, Judge Pratt emphasized that the plaintiffs had knowledge of the conduct itself long before 2024, stating, "Plaintiffs therefore plead that they had knowledge that Defendants were the cause of their alleged injuries long before 2024." The court dismissed the Title IX complaints with prejudice, preventing the plaintiffs from refiling them. The ruling also addressed the plaintiffs' right to appeal to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals within 30 days.
Investigation Findings
An independent investigation commissioned by Indiana University concluded that Bomba did not act in "bad faith" during the examinations. The report, conducted by the law firm Jones Day, stated that Bomba's practices, while uncommon, were not clearly unreasonable given the medical standards of the time. The investigation found no evidence of sexual gratification in Bomba's conduct.
Criticism and Opposition
The plaintiffs expressed disappointment with the court's decision. Mujezinovic stated in an email, "We are disappointed in the Court's decision, but are taking time to weigh our options and make informed decisions about next steps." Critics of the ruling may argue that the court's interpretation of the statute of limitations does not adequately consider the complexities of understanding past abuses, particularly in cases involving institutional power dynamics.
Verbatim Quotes
- “We are disappointed in the Court's decision, but are taking time to weigh our options and make informed decisions about next steps.” — Haris Mujezinovic, Plaintiff
- “Plaintiffs therefore plead that they had knowledge that Defendants were the cause of their alleged injuries long before 2024,” — Judge Tanya Walton Pratt
What's Next
The plaintiffs have the option to appeal the ruling to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which may provide further legal clarity on the application of the statute of limitations in cases of alleged sexual abuse in educational institutions.
