Attorney on call · 24/7 · Risk-free consultation
212 300 5196
SECTION B · PROCEDURAL STAGE · B21

Preponderance or clear and convincing: find out which.

Schools choose their standard of proof, and the choice changes the defense substantially. The rule adds one constraint that respondents rarely invoke: whichever standard an institution selects, it must apply the same one to formal complaints against students and against employees.
FIND IT IN THE POLICY
It is stated in the grievance procedures. If you cannot find it, ask in writing - and check that the same standard appears in the employee-facing policy.
WHICH RULES GOVERN YOUR CASE The 2020 Title IX regulations. The 2024 rewrite was vacated and does not apply.
RULE TRACKER →
THE BRIEFING · THE STANDARD OF PROOF

The standard of proof is the single most consequential procedural variable in a campus case, and most respondents never learn which one applies to them until the determination letter recites it.

The choice, and the constraint.

The 2020 regulations permit institutions to use either the preponderance of the evidence standard or the clear and convincing evidence standard, and require that the standard chosen be applied to all formal complaints of sexual harassment - including complaints against employees and faculty. The choice belongs to the institution; the consistency requirement does not.

What the difference does to a case.

Under preponderance, a two-account case with no independent corroboration is decided by a bare majority of the probabilities, which in practice means whichever narrative the decision-maker finds marginally more coherent. That places enormous weight on documentary corroboration - the timing evidence, the complete threads, the behavioural record. Under clear and convincing, unresolved inconsistency within an account is frequently enough on its own, and the argument becomes about the burden itself.

Why it must be argued repeatedly.

Decision-makers drift. A panel that has read an investigative report containing credibility observations can slide toward asking which account it prefers rather than whether the institution has met its burden. Stating the standard expressly in the evidence response, at the hearing, and in the appeal is not pedantry - it is the argument. And a determination letter that recites the wrong standard, or applies it inconsistently, is an error of law on judicial review.

Why you should call us.

If you are scrolling through search results trying to find someone to defend you, your search is over. You have found Spodek Law Group P.C. - and we are not your average defense firm. We know a thing or two about defending the accused in campus cases - and in the criminal courts that run alongside them. Over 50 years of combined experience, some of the toughest cases in the country, and we have come out on top. We have seen it all, and we empathise with you. We understand how frightening this is, and we have a legal team who can fight and win.

Unlike other attorneys who care about their reputation with the administrators and the prosecutors, our only goal is getting you the best outcome. We owe loyalty to only you. Our lawyers listen to you, your fears, and your goals. We care about your story, and that is where the work begins - by understanding and listening to you.

On billing, we are transparent about our fees, and there are no surprises. Choosing a lawyer is a big deal and cost is a real issue, so we are committed to being your champion irrespective of your ability to pay. Our firm has a simple belief: lawyers should only take on clients whom they can truly help. Many firms are mills that take every case through the door. We do not.

Working with us starts with a risk-free consultation, in person or over the phone. You can ask us anything, for as long as it takes, and we encourage you to ask the tough questions. We are available 24/7, we practise coast to coast, and every client has direct access to a partner. Call 212 300 5196 - an attorney answers.

GENERAL INFORMATION, NOT LEGAL ADVICE. YOUR SCHOOL’S POLICY AND YOUR FACTS DECIDE EVERYTHING - AND THE CONSULTATION IS FREE. Skip reading - just call →
WHAT EACH STANDARD ACTUALLY MEANS
Five practical differences.
The gap between these is the difference between a coin flip and a real burden.
PREP
More likely than not
A bare majority of the probabilities. In a two-account case with no corroboration, that is close to a tie broken by impression.
MOST COMMON
C&C
Highly probable
Substantially more likely. Unresolved inconsistency in an account is frequently enough to defeat it.
BETTER FOR YOU
DIFF
Effect on strategy
Under preponderance, corroboration work is everything. Under clear and convincing, the argument is the standard itself.
CHANGES THE CASE
RULE
Same standard for all
The institution must apply its chosen standard to complaints against employees as well as students.
THE CONSTRAINT
CRIM
For comparison
Criminal court requires beyond a reasonable doubt. That gap is why the two forums diverge routinely.
PARALLEL TRACK
The same-standard rule is worth checking. Institutions occasionally apply clear and convincing to faculty and preponderance to students, or the reverse. That is a compliance failure, it is visible by comparing two published documents, and it is worth raising in writing.
ARGUING THE STANDARD
Four moves.
The standard is not just a background fact. It is an argument to be made repeatedly and on the record.
01State it at every stage
In the ten-day response, at the hearing, and in the appeal. Decision-makers drift from it.
02Frame the evidence against it
Not “this is doubtful” but “this does not meet the standard the policy adopts.”
03Check the employee policy
Compare the two documents. Divergence is a documented compliance failure.
04Attack misstatement in the letter
A determination reciting the wrong standard is an error of law on review.
KEEP READING · THE TITLE IX SET
Where this page hands you off.
No page on this site is a dead end. These are the next questions people ask after this one, in the order they usually ask them.
Todd A. Spodek, Managing Partner
FIG. - THE PRINCIPAL
THE LAWYER THE PRESS CALLS
You've seen the defense on Netflix. This is the firm behind it.

Todd A. Spodek is a second-generation trial lawyer whose defense of Anna Delvey became Netflix's Inventing Anna. He appears on Fox News and CNN as a legal analyst, authored "My Advice to Diddy" in The Spectator, and is quoted by the Associated Press when the biggest federal cases break. The record behind the profile: a complete acquittal in a $26M money-laundering trial, RICO charges carrying a 10-year minimum dismissed, and 6 months on a $12M Ponzi case.

Why this firm.

SPODEK LAW GROUP P.C. · EST. 1976
01
Second generation, since 1976

Thousands of clients across five decades. We have dealt with your issue before.

02
Loyalty to only you

No allegiance to prosecutors or judges. The client is the only constituency.

03
Nationwide, fully online

A complete client portal - documents, invoices, communications - coast to coast.

04
Selective by design

We only take clients we can truly help - and every accepted case gets the whole bench.

THE FIRM FILM · 00:45 · WHO WE ARE
ALL APPEARANCES →
45 SECONDS INSIDE THE FIRM

See who fights for you before you ever call.

Who we are, how we work, and why clients nationwide trust us with their future - in under a minute.

The Spodek Law Group P.C. bench

The team on your case.

EVERY ACCEPTED CASE GETS THE WHOLE BENCH · 24/7
Meet the bench →
Todd A. Spodek
MANAGING PARTNER
Todd A. Spodek
The Netflix defense · Fox & CNN analyst
Ralph P. Franco, Jr.
ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY
Ralph P. Franco, Jr.
Court appearances · case strategy
Alex Zhik
ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY
Alex Zhik
Criminal defense · client strategy
Jeremy Feigenbaum, working the file
ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY
Jeremy Feigenbaum
Motions · investigations
Claire Banks
ASSOCIATE
Claire Banks
Federal motions · S.D.N.Y. & E.D.N.Y.
Joseph Alter
ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY
Joseph Alter
Trial practice · not guilty on all counts, 2025
RB
OF-COUNSEL
Rajesh Barua
Immigration · removal defense
CL
OF-COUNSEL
Chad Lewin
Los Angeles · 23+ years
50+ years combined
Second generation, since 1976. Selective by design - loyal to only you.
PUT THEM ON YOUR CASE →

How your case unfolds.

THE FULL PROCESS →
01 · TODAY
The consultation

Risk-free, in person or by phone. Ask anything, for as long as it takes. Strategy starts the same day.

02
Investigation & evidence

Witnesses, reports, footage, experts - building the record that pokes holes in theirs.

03
Motions, negotiation - or trial

Suppress, dismiss, negotiate from strength. And if trial is the advantage - we are unafraid.

★★★★★VERIFIED CLIENT · FEDERAL CASE · 2022 · VIA GOOGLE REVIEWS
"The best lawyer anyone could ask for. Todd changed our lives."
1,100+ FIVE-STAR GOOGLE REVIEWS →
FROM THE RECORD · S.D.N.Y. & BEYOND
Acquittal$26M money laundering
DismissedRICO - 10-year mandatory minimum
6 months$12M Ponzi - prosecutors asked for years
RISK FREE · CONFIDENTIAL · 24/7

Get ahead of the case.

Answered within 24 hours, guaranteed. Some stories are better told out loud -

212 300 5196
AFTER YOU REACH OUT
01A person answers - not a service. Day or night. 02Free, confidential consultation - ask us anything, regardless of how long it takes. 03Strategy starts the same day - and you hold the senior partner's cell number.
★★★★★1,100+ FIVE-STAR GOOGLE REVIEWS
READ THEM →
INTAKE · PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL
24/7
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
01
02
03
04
05
EVERYTHING YOU SHARE IS PROTECTED BY ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE FROM THE FIRST WORD.