McAllister Olivarius in the news

sexual harassment

After extensive settlement negotiations, UCLA has removed Professor Gabriel Piterberg from employment at the university, denied him emeritus status, and removed him from all future employment with the University of California. 

Read more

The Sunday Times looks at the urgent problem of sexual harassment and assault at universities in the UK.

Dr Ann Olivarius advises the newspaper that legislation, compulsory consent classes and financial penalties are the only remedies that will bring about a change.

Read more

The Economist interviews Dr Ann Olivarius on a new law which requires all Minnesota freshmen to be given anti-rape training within the first 10 days of the school year.

Read the full story: The Economist: Campus Sexual Assault Re-Education


Dr Ann Olivarius was interviewed alongside Rachel Krys from End Violence Against Women on the day a new report from the Crown Prosecution Service reveals violent crimes against women in England and Wales have reached a record high.

While the number of prosecutions has also hit record levels, our Senior Partner explained why the new laws to protect women and girls from physical violence as well psychological control via social media don’t go far enough.

The newspaper reports on growing concerns that the widespread harassment of students by staff remains invisible thanks to the confidentiality clauses being included in settlement agreements.

Read more

Inside Higher Ed questions the return of a professor to a Los Angeles university when he cannot be trusted alone with students.

A  UCLA investigation into sexual harassment claims made in a lawsuit we filed on behalf of graduate students Nerfertiti Takla and Kristen Glasgow resulted in a financial penalty and open-door office rule for history professor Gabriel Piterberg.

The students’ lawyer, McAllister Olivarius Associate Michael Porcello, said: ‘The most egregious piece of this to us is that Piterberg has gotten off with more or less a slap on the wrist.’

He added: ‘We do not consider these terms, when you look at them closely, to be those that would protect other clients who could be harassed in the future by this predator.’