Judge Lets Ex-Harvard Hockey Coach File Reply in Latest Clash Over Discrimination Suit

A judge allowed former Harvard women’s ice hockey coach Katey Stone to make a second reply to the University’s motion to dismiss her gender discrimination lawsuit, letting Stone’s filing proceed despite Harvard’s opposition.

Stone — who resigned from her position as head coach following allegations she created a toxic team culture — sued Harvard in Massachusetts District Court in July, claiming Harvard would not have pushed her out if she were a male coach.

Harvard motioned to dismiss Stone’s suit in October. Since then, Stone and Harvard have sparred back and forth in their replies.

Harvard attempted to block Stone’s latest reply, arguing that the document rehashed arguments from her earlier filings and would not be “necessary or useful to the court.” But Magistrate Judge Jennifer C. Boal, who is overseeing the case, sided with Stone in the tiff.

In her most recent filing, Stone accused Harvard of pushing her out because of a “baseless media frenzy.”

Stone claimed the University relied on accusations in reports by The Boston Globe and The Athletic in its legal arguments, despite finding in its own investigation that she was “innocent of the alleged misconduct.”

Harvard’s review, which was conducted by an outside law firm and concluded in June 2023, found that the women’s ice hockey team “has not fostered a culture of hazing” but described some team traditions as “harmful.”

FAS Spokesperson James M. Chisholm declined to comment, citing University policy against commenting on active litigation. Stone’s legal team did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Stone’s legal counsel Regina M. Federico wrote in a statement that Stone’s surreply “shed further light on the suffering she endured” and that her legal team was “pleased” with the judge’s decision.

In the surreply, Stone also maintained that she implicitly raised claims of a hostile work environment in her initial complaint, where she alleged Harvard underpaid her, disciplined her unfairly, and failed to protect her from allegations in the media.

Harvard had urged the judge to dismiss Stone’s hostile work environment claims, arguing that Stone asserted them retroactively and did not raise them in her initial complaint.

In tit-for-tat filings since the fall, the University’s lawyers have argued Stone’s discrimination claims were filed past the statute of limitations, while Stone has asserted her arguments should stay on the table because she was subject to a pervasive pattern of discrimination.

A hearing on Harvard’s motion to dismiss is scheduled for Feb. 24.

—Staff writer Elyse C. Goncalves can be reached at elyse.goncalves@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @e1ysegoncalves.

—Staff writer Akshaya Ravi can be reached at akshaya.ravi@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @akshayaravi22.