A Wake County Superior Court judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by 31 former North Carolina State University male athletes who alleged years of sexual abuse by the program’s former director of sports medicine. Judge Bryan Collins ruled the claims against Robert M. Murphy Jr. and several NC State athletic officials could not proceed due to procedural issues. The decision marks a significant turn in a case that has drawn attention to athlete safety protocols in collegiate sports programs across the nation.
The lawsuit, filed in February in state court, expanded on allegations that first emerged in 2022 when a single athlete came forward with a federal complaint. The former athletes accused Murphy of misconduct spanning multiple years, including inappropriate touching during massage therapy sessions and intrusive observation practices during drug testing procedures. Despite the dismissal, the legal team representing the athletes announced plans to appeal and indicated new claims would be added from additional former students who recently came forward.
Statute of limitations becomes central issue in dismissal
Judge Collins granted the motion from Murphy’s defense team to dismiss the case primarily on grounds that the statute of limitations had expired for claims dating back to 2013. The ruling addressed the temporal boundaries of legal action in cases involving alleged abuse within educational institutions. Legal experts note that statutes of limitations in abuse cases vary by state and can create significant barriers for survivors seeking justice, particularly when allegations involve incidents that occurred years or decades earlier.
The procedural dismissal means the court did not evaluate the merits of the abuse allegations themselves. Instead, the decision centered on whether the claims were filed within legally permissible time frames. This distinction became a key point of emphasis for both sides following the ruling. The defense characterized the outcome as vindication, while the plaintiffs’ attorneys stressed that the dismissal reflected only procedural matters rather than the validity of the abuse claims.
Athletic officials removed from case on jurisdictional grounds
In addition to dismissing claims against Murphy, Judge Collins also removed several NC State athletic officials from the lawsuit based on jurisdictional grounds. Former athletic director Debbie Yow and current athletic director Boo Corrigan were among those dismissed from the case. The plaintiffs had alleged these officials bore responsibility through oversight failures that allegedly allowed the misconduct to continue.
- The original lawsuit named Murphy as the primary defendant for alleged direct misconduct.
- Athletic administrators were included based on claims of inadequate supervision and response.
- Jurisdictional issues prevented certain officials from remaining in the state court case.
- The dismissal of administrators does not preclude them from being named in future federal actions.
The removal of university officials from the case narrows the scope of potential institutional accountability. However, legal observers note that separate administrative or federal proceedings could still examine the role of athletic department leadership in athlete protection protocols. The university issued a statement emphasizing its commitment to student safety while declining to comment on specific legal proceedings.
Attorney statements reveal sharp divide over case outcome
Kery Sutton, the attorney representing the former NC State athletes, issued a statement emphasizing that the dismissal had no bearing on the substance of the abuse allegations. Sutton indicated that an appeal would be filed and revealed that additional former athletes had recently contacted the legal team with new claims against the university. The attorney framed the procedural dismissal as a temporary setback rather than a final resolution of the underlying allegations.
Murphy’s attorney, Jared Hammett, presented a markedly different interpretation of the ruling. Hammett stated that the dismissal demonstrated that “nothing happened but a man’s career being ruined for money.” The defense attorney described Murphy as someone who dedicated his professional life to working with athletes and characterized the legal proceedings as an unjust attack on his client’s reputation. Hammett’s statement suggested the defense views the case as lacking merit beyond procedural considerations.
Case timeline traces back to 2022 federal complaint
The current lawsuit represents an expansion of legal action that began in August 2022 when former men’s soccer player Benjamin Locke filed the original federal lawsuit. Locke was one of only two plaintiffs in the recent case who filed under their actual names rather than using “John Doe” designations to protect anonymity. The original complaint detailed allegations of misconduct by Murphy during his tenure as the athletic program’s director of sports medicine.
The accusations included claims that Murphy improperly touched athletes’ genitals during massage therapy sessions under the guise of legitimate medical treatment. Additional allegations involved intrusive observation practices during urine sampling for mandatory drug testing protocols. These claims sparked an expanded investigation that eventually led 31 former male athletes from various sports programs to join the legal action. The case drew comparisons to other high-profile scandals involving medical professionals in collegiate and Olympic sports programs.
University maintains commitment to student athlete safety
North Carolina State University released a statement following the dismissal emphasizing that the institution does not condone sexual misconduct of any kind. The statement asserted that the health and safety of students and student-athletes remains paramount to the university and its athletic programs. The carefully worded response avoided specific references to the allegations against Murphy or the dismissed lawsuit while reaffirming general institutional policies.
The university’s response reflects the delicate position educational institutions face when addressing allegations involving former employees and current legal proceedings. Campus safety advocates have called for greater transparency in how universities investigate and respond to abuse allegations within athletic departments. The NC State case adds to ongoing national conversations about power dynamics, institutional accountability, and protection mechanisms for student athletes in collegiate sports programs. As the plaintiffs’ legal team prepares an appeal, the case remains unresolved despite the procedural dismissal.
