Updated June 5, 2026, at 2:15 p.m.
A former student is suing GW, alleging that officials failed to provide her with disability accommodations and invalidly forced her to withdraw from the University for reasons related to her disability.
In the lawsuit filed in the D.C. Superior Court on April 30, Hande Müge Aksu, who is representing herself in the case, argued the University failed to provide reasonable accommodation after she underwent brain surgery in 2003 and coerced her into signing a agreement withdrawing her from the University and barring her from returning. Aksu is seeking $400,000 in damages to compensate for her loss of an educational opportunity, emotional distress and financial damages she suffered as a result of the University’s actions.
The suit argues officials’ actions constitute disability discrimination, coercion and duress, intentional infliction of emotional distress and unjust enrichment.
“The lawsuit was never simply about a disagreement with a university,” Aksu said in an email. “For me, it has always been about access, fairness, accountability, and the ability of an individual with limited resources to be heard.”
The three-page suit alleges University officials knew of Aksu’s disability status, and when she was in a “documented medical crisis” as a result of her surgery, officials failed to engage in required accommodation processes.
The University did not respond to a request for comment on the suit.
The suit alleges officials summoned Aksu to a meeting with the Office of Student Judicial Services, now Conflict Education & Student Accountability, where GW Police Department officers were present, she was denied legal counsel and given no time to review the withdrawal agreement. Aksu alleges officials coerced her into signing the withdrawal agreement at the meeting and promised her financial consideration in exchange for signing the document.
Officials allegedly told Aksu she would be arrested or barred from returning to the University if she did not sign the document, which she signed under “coercive conditions,” according to the lawsuit. The suit claims the signed document is invalid and unenforceable due to execution under duress, lack of informed consent, denial of legal counsel, coercive threats and Aksu’s compromised medical condition at the time.
Aksu has also requested a declaratory judgement invalidating the withdrawal agreement and any additional relief the court deems just and proper.
Attorneys from the firm Saul Ewing LLP filed a “Notice of Removal” on May 18 on the University’s behalf, moving the case to the U.S. District Court for D.C. The attorneys then filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on May 26, arguing the statute of limitations has passed for the alleged actions described in Aksu’s suit as the events happened over 20 years ago and that Aksu did not follow proper legal procedure by failing to properly serve the University with court documents.
The motion then asks the court to dismiss each count for reasons including untimeliness and inadequacy, also arguing that Aksu’s allegations are “conclusory and threadbare.”
Officials also attached a copy of the withdrawal agreement Aksu signed to their motion, dated Sept. 15, 2005. The document stipulates Aksu agree to permanently withdraw from the University and that she is barred from University property, activities and events, as well as agreeing that she “forever releases” and “holds harmless” GW from any claims, damages or liabilities. Tara Woolfson, then-director of SJS and Dennis Blumer, then-vice president and general counsel for the University, also signed the document.
On May 29, Aksu requested emergency motions for various forms of relief, including waived fees for electronic case files, remote participation and an order directing the University to pay her $225,000 to reimburse litigation expenses and outstanding credit card debts caused by the University’s movement of the case from state court to a U.S. District Court.
The court granted Aksu’s motion for waived fees and remote participation, but denied her request for monetary relief on June 2
On June 3, Aksu filed another motion for emergency relief, seeking appointment of counsel. The court denied this request, stating that Aksu, who has proceeded pro se — or representing herself, without an attorney or other legal counsel — did not indicate what efforts, if any, she has taken to secure counsel on her own.
Aksu said pursuing litigation in the United States has presented financial and practical challenges since she is a disabled individual living in Turkey with limited financial resources, prompting her to pursue her claims in Turkey instead. She said a Turkish court has already accepted the case, granted legal aid and provided her with accessible electronic participation.
Aksu said she is disappointed that the University chose to “fight” a disabled former student through legal proceedings, adding that it has been difficult and costly. She declined to share documentation regarding the Turkish proceedings.
“I believe an institution of higher education should treat disabled students fairly and should make genuine efforts to resolve disputes before forcing former students into lengthy and expensive litigation,” Aksu said in an email.
This post was updated to correct the following:
An earlier version of this post incorrectly spelled former Vice President and General Counsel Dennis Blumer’s name. It is spelled Dennis Blumer. We regret this error.
