News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Aug. 18, 2005
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
Being the recipient of the school’s action in this case (and initiator of litigation), perhaps the most interesting note to the decision was the fact that the Court acknowledges (as I did) that it was never stated that I was not guilty of the charges. What the suit was about was the procedure used to decide the penalty for the conduct. In that respect, the Court declined to address the issue, instead sticking with the idea that because I was convicted of (and indeed pleaded guilty to) a felony, of course any action of the school was therefore justified.
My argument was that disciplinary hearings have a two-fold purpose. To determine guilt or innocence, and to determine a penalty. While the procedure used was adequate to determine guilt or innocence, the procedure was inadequate to properly determine a penalty because I received “bare minimum” procedures, which while constitutionally adequate, certainly were at the bottom end of the scale.
At best, the ruling vidicates my fervent belief that the school did not live up to the standards that all institutions should strive for. While a personal loss for me, I think it’s a defining case in education law with some forward reaching guidance for institutions of higher education on how to uphold not just the wording of the Constitution, but the spirit as well.
Flaim, FLAIM, at 4:23 am EDT on October 5, 2005
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Posting Description: The University of Colorado Denver, School of Pharmacy is entering a major growth and ... see job
Located just north of Houston, Texas, our five campuses serve 1,400 square miles. Our student enrollment is nearly 50,000 in ... see job
Case Western Reserve University, one of the nation’s foremost research universities with a deep commitment to undergraduate ... see job
Undergraduate Drama. Serve as Office Manager for Office of the Chair of Undergraduate Drama and provide administrative and ... see job
Math Diagnostic Testing Project (MDTP) Site Director at UCLA see job
Center for Health Communications
Duties And Responsibilities: Over the past 20 years, SPH’s ... see job
Join the Pack! A community with nearly 8,000 faculty and staff, and 30,000 students. NC State is one of the largest employers ... see job
Job Summary: Reporting directly to the Director of the Westminster Law Library, the FCIL librarian ... see job
Towson University invites applications for a tenure track entry-level assistant professor position in the Department of ... see job
Our last department head left for a Dean’s position. Ambitious person sought to take his place. see job
Flaim
It is worth noting that at every step of the court’s analysis, the court noted that the plaintiff had not shown any specific prejudice. (E.g. when analyzing the lack of cross-examination the court concludes that “We assume that any discrepancies, to the extent they might have existed, would not have been sufficient to convince the Committee that Flaim had not been convicted of a felony.”)
In situations where “facts” beyond mere “conviction” may be at stake, it is likely that a student would suffer real prejudice from not being allowed to cross-examine a witness, and schools should not see this as a license to further abridge their procedures. Though, an easier procedure would be to simply allow the school to move for a form of “summary judgment” in advance, and allow the student to make an offer of proof regarding exactly dispute facts he intends to prove or disprove at trial.
Larry, at 11:18 am EDT on August 18, 2005