Doe v. Brown Univ.
Decision Date | 27 June 2016 |
Docket Number | C.A. No. 15-239-M-PAS |
Citation | 209 F.Supp.3d 460 |
Parties | Jane DOE, Plaintiff, v. BROWN UNIVERSITY, et al., Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Rhode Island |
Andrew T. Miltenberg, Tara J. Novack, Nesenoff & Miltenberg LLP, New York, NY, Samuel D. Zurier, Oliverio & Marcaccio, LLP, Providence, RI, for Plaintiff.
Beverly E. Ledbetter, Thomas R. Bender, Office of General Counsel, Brown University, Providence, RI, for Defendants.
Jane Doe, a senior at Brown University, was caught cheating on a take-home exam and admitted as much in a letter to the University's Academic Code Committee. Applying the Academic Code, Brown conducted a hearing and imposed a punishment that was harsher than Jane Doe likely expected, because this turned out to be her second incident of plagiarism in her four years on campus. Despite this history of academic dishonesty, the University permitted Jane Doe to graduate on time with a Brown University degree. Rather than move on from this sad history in her academic career, Jane Doe brought suit alleging various contract and tort claims against the University and its employees about the process and discipline that Brown administered. This Court finds that Brown did not breach its contract with Jane Doe, and that Jane Doe has established no other actionable claims against the University or its employees. The Court therefore grants summary judgment for the Defendants.
The facts relevant to resolving this legal matter are not in dispute.
Brown University's Academic Code is contained in a document entitled "Academic & Student Conduct Codes," which Brown provided to Jane Doe when she accepted the University's offer of admission. ECF No. 1-1; ECF No. 1 at 5-6 ¶ 28. The Academic Code is a concise portion of that document, which lists academic offenses, procedures for Academic Code hearings, and penalties for violating the Code.1 ECF No. 1-1 at 2.
The introductory section of the Academic Code, entitled "Basic Policy," states:
The section labeled "Offenses Against the Academic Code" contains the following relevant provisions:
*****
Next, the Academic Code explains the "Procedures for Academic Code Hearings":
*****
Finally, the Code also lists the "Penalties for Violating the Academic Code":
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Doe v. W. New Eng. Univ.
...of the case on appeal (Dkt. No. 1–2 at 45). Courts do not rewrite such provisions. See Doe v. Brown Univ. , C.A. No. 15-239-M-PAS, 209 F.Supp.3d 460, 472, 2016 WL 3570606, at *9 (D.R.I. June 27, 2016) (quoting Gorman v. St. Raphael Acad. , 853 A.2d 28, 34 (R.I. 2004) ). Plaintiff raised the......
-
Armstrong v. Clarkson Coll.
...arbitrarily, capriciously, or in bad faith"). See, also, Mangla v. Brown University, 135 F.3d 80 (1st Cir. 1998) ; Doe v. Brown University, 209 F.Supp.3d 460 (D.R.I. 2016) ; Holert v. Univ. of Chicago, 751 F.Supp. 1294 (N.D. Ill. 1990) ; Seitz-Partridge v. Loyola University, 409 Ill.App.3d ......
-
Lopez v. Garcia-Padilla
... ... See CarnegieMellon Univ. v. Cohill , 484 U.S. 343, 349, 108 S.Ct. 614, 98 L.Ed.2d 720 (1988) (explaining that the exercise of pendent jurisdiction is a matter of the ... ...
-
Doe v. Brown Univ.
...not to call any witnesses, opting instead to admit to and to apologize for having relied on T.L. in answering question #4. See Doe, 209 F. Supp. 3d at 474. Neither Professor Clark nor T.L. appeared as witnesses against Doe. Id.The Committee concluded that "by making unauthorized use of the ......