example of peer-on-peer sexual harassment in violation of Title IX, where, as a result of peer sexual harassment, student is prevented from using an “athletic field”). 15 . See id. 16 . See supra part II.A for a discussion of Eleventh Amendment immunity. 17 . These claims are for fraud, negligent retention, and invasion of privacy. 18 . These claims are for intentional interference with contractual relations, assault, battery, fraud, and invasion of privacy. 19 . See generally Noell v. Winston, 51 N.C.App. 455, 457, 276 S.E.2d 766, 768 (1981) ("[W]e have been unable to find any authority in this State recognizing [a cause of action for interference with a business relationship or expectancy of an attorney]”). But see Dalton v. Camp, 138 N.C.App. 201, 531 S.E.2d 258, 265 (2000) (<HOLDING>); Market Am., Inc. v. Rossi, No. 1:97CV00891,
holding that an action for tortious interference with prospective economic advantage may not be directed against an individual who is an officer and the sole stockholder of a corporation which is a party to the economic relationship at issue holding that the first element in a prima facie case of tortious interference with prospective business advantage is the existence of business expectancy recognizing action for tortious interference with prospective advantage recognizing the tort of interference with prospective contractual relations as a subspecies of the broader tort of interference with prospective economic advantage holding that the plaintiff stated a claim for tortious interference