[dabigv13]

Thanks, for some reason there was no events tab to open on my phone but I found it on desktop mode. 

From the complaint, it sounds like there were two events, on Jan 15th paramedics were called and he refused care, and then on the 17th he was found dead in the bathroom.

I don't find the argument persuasive that because a local DA announced percocet laced with fentanyl was found in the area, that the university has any responsibility for telling their students about that. It's not stipulated that the DA informed Stanford of anything.

Lot of internal contradictions in the facts stipulated by the complaint-

In the early evening hours 0f January 15th, TDX’s Resident Assistant(“RA”) Tim Michael, a student and member 0f the TDX fraternity who is employed by Stanford, learned that Eitan had 10st both speaking and motor functions. Both are symptoms of a Fentanyl overdose.
40.The RA contacted Stanford’s Residence Dean(“RD”) assigned t0 the TDX house to report the situation. The RD directed the RA to dial 9-11.The RD, however, did not take any immediate actions, instead suggesting that the RA contact the “0ncall” RD. This anemic response violated Stanford’s Residential Education policies.
41.When first responders arrived, Eitan declined further medical care. At the same time, and contrary to the Fundamental Standard and Stanford’s other policies and procedures, as well as TDX’s policies and procedures, and state and federal law, Defendants Dill De-Sa, Khattak, and Mitchell actively concealed evidence and misled first responders and others regarding the presence 0f controlled substances within the TDX house, the distribution 0f controlled substances from the TDX house, and their and Eitan’s use of controlled substances.
42.Stanford took no further action even though the distribution, dispensation, possession, 0r use of a controlled substance is considered an “egregious” Violation 0f campus policy and may result in disciplinary sanctions up to and including expulsion

How is Stanford supposed to discipline the students if the evidence of drug use was hidden? How would the RA know that the passed out student who had enough capacity to refuse medical care had consumed any fentanyl?

There are many lawyers on the board who would know better than I how much trouble Stanford could be in here, but I just don't see how Stanford is responsible in any way for this unfortunate kid's poor decisions.

[dabigv13]

Thanks, for some reason there was no events tab to open on my phone but I found it on desktop mode. 

From the complaint, it sounds like there were two events, on Jan 15th paramedics were called and he refused care, and then on the 17th he was found dead in the bathroom.

I don't find the argument persuasive that because a local DA announced percocet laced with fentanyl was found in the area, that the university has any responsibility for telling their students about that. It's not stipulated that the DA informed Stanford of anything.

Lot of internal contradictions in the facts stipulated by the complaint-

In the early evening hours 0f January 15th, TDX’s Resident Assistant(“RA”) Tim Michael, a student and member 0f the TDX fraternity who is employed by Stanford, learned that Eitan had 10st both speaking and motor functions. Both are symptoms of a Fentanyl overdose.
40.The RA contacted Stanford’s Residence Dean(“RD”) assigned t0 the TDX house to report the situation. The RD directed the RA to dial 9-11.The RD, however, did not take any immediate actions, instead suggesting that the RA contact the “0ncall” RD. This anemic response violated Stanford’s Residential Education policies.
41.When first responders arrived, Eitan declined further medical care. At the same time, and contrary to the Fundamental Standard and Stanford’s other policies and procedures, as well as TDX’s policies and procedures, and state and federal law, Defendants Dill De-Sa, Khattak, and Mitchell actively concealed evidence and misled first responders and others regarding the presence 0f controlled substances within the TDX house, the distribution 0f controlled substances from the TDX house, and their and Eitan’s use of controlled substances.
42.Stanford took no further action even though the distribution, dispensation, possession, 0r use of a controlled substance is considered an “egregious” Violation 0f campus policy and may result in disciplinary sanctions up to and including expulsion

How is Stanford supposed to discipline the students if the evidence of drug use was hidden? How would the RA know that the passed out student who had enough capacity to refuse medical care had consumed any fentanyl?

There are many lawyers on the board who would know better than I how much trouble Stanford could be in here, but I just don't see how Stanford is responsible in any way for this unfortunate kid's poor decisions.