BlogLine

District court finds that university had no special duty to protect minors visiting campus

4/17/25

By: Courtney M. Knight

On Feb. 4, 2025, the District Court of New Jersey found that it would not be fair “to impose upon Princeton a proactive duty to monitor and protect all comers who walk onto its campus – and to take steps to ensure their safety once they leave.”

In June of 1970, Princeton University began an “open campus” policy inviting members of the surrounding community to enter the campus. In 2021, the plaintiff in N.S. v. Harnad, Civ. No. 21-19820, 2025 WL 608111 (Feb. 4, 2025) alleged that as a result of that policy, she, at age 14, met a student also working as a teaching assistant on campus who groomed her before inviting her off campus, where he sexually assaulted her. N.S. sought to hold Princeton University accountable under theories of negligence. 

While acknowledging the seriousness of child grooming and sexual assault, the court relied upon a lack of foreseeability to determine that Princeton did not owe the minor a duty to protect her from the alleged grooming or off-campus criminal activity. N.S. alleged that Princeton University employees saw her spending time with the abuser, however, the complaint indicated that the alleged touching and inappropriate behavior occurred in private, the abuse occurred off campus and only innocuous activities like talking, eating lunch or driving occurred in plain sight.

The court found that the facts, as alleged by N.S., did not rise above a speculative level that the university knew or should have known that its student/employee was grooming N.S. or intended to sexually assault her off campus. Accordingly, the risk of harm to N.S. was not reasonably foreseeable and Princeton did not have a legal duty to prevent N.S.’s injury.

This decision is a reminder that landowners and employers are not omniscient and should only be held liable where the harm is actually foreseeable.

For more information on the topic, contact Courtney M. Knight at courtney.knight@fmglaw.com or your local FMG relationship partner. 

Information conveyed herein should not be construed as legal advice or represent any specific or binding policy or procedure of any organization. Information provided is for educational purposes only. These materials are written in a general format and are not intended to be advice applicable to any specific circumstance. Legal opinions may vary when based on subtle factual distinctions. All rights reserved. No part of this presentation may be reproduced, published or posted without the written permission of Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP.