Hyman v. Cornell Univ.
| Decision Date | 03 March 2011 |
| Citation | 918 N.Y.S.2d 226,82 A.D.3d 1309 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Marita HYMAN, Appellant, v. CORNELL UNIVERSITY, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
82 A.D.3d 1309
In the Matter of Marita HYMAN, Appellant,
v.
CORNELL UNIVERSITY, Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
March 3, 2011.
Schwartz, Lichten & Bright, P.C., New York City (Arthur Z. Schwartz of counsel), for appellant.
Nelson E. Roth, Office of the University Counsel, Cornell University, Ithaca, for respondent.
Before: CARDONA, P.J., MERCURE, SPAIN, MALONE JR. and STEIN, JJ.
MERCURE, J.
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Mulvey, J.), entered December 7, 2009 in Tompkins County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of respondent finding that, among other things, petitioner violated respondent's Code of Conduct.
Petitioner, a graduate student at respondent, exchanged a series of e-mails with senior professor Davydd Greenwood until she suggested that they have a sexual affair, causing him to request that she no longer contact him. Petitioner nevertheless continued to send e-mails to Greenwood. In November 2004, Greenwood indicated that he would take formal action against petitioner if she persisted in communicating with him, and petitioner agreed to cease any further communication. She adhered to that agreement until November 2006 when she copied Greenwood on an e-mail to respondent's president stating that her "institutional rights" had been repeatedly violated by the faculty of the Anthropology Department.
Greenwood then instituted proceedings against petitioner, and ultimately filed a complaint accusing her of harassment in violation of respondent's Code of Conduct.1 Petitioner, in turn, filed a complaint against Greenwood, accusing him of sexual harassment and retaliation. Petitioner's complaint was dismissed as lacking in merit and, following a hearing, the University Hearing Board determined that petitioner harassed Greenwood. The Hearing Board issued a written reprimand and a no-contact order, which was affirmed on appeal
with a minor modification. Supreme Court dismissed the petition in this ensuing CPLR article 78 proceeding and, upon petitioner's appeal, we now affirm.It is well settled that in reviewing a university's disciplinary determinations, "court[s] must determine 'whether the university substantially adhered to its own published rules and guidelines for disciplinary proceedings' " ( Matter of Warner v. Elmira Coll., 59 A.D.3d 909, 910, 873 N.Y.S.2d 381...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hyman v. Schwartz
...with disciplinary action taken against her while she was a graduate student at Cornell University (Matter of Hyman v. Cornell Univ., 82 A.D.3d 1309, 918 N.Y.S.2d 226 [2011] ). Schwartz also represented plaintiff in a Title IX action (see 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. ) against Cornell in federal......
-
Hyman v. Schwartz
...plaintiff in a Title IX claim ( see20 USC § 1681 et seq.). After both of those matters were unsuccessful (Matter of Hyman v. Cornell Univ., 82 A.D.3d 1309, 918 N.Y.S.2d 226 [2011];Hyman v. Cornell Univ., 834 F.Supp.2d 77 [2011] ), plaintiff commenced the instant action against Schwartz, def......
-
Doe v. Syracuse Univ.
...respondent failed to substantially comply with its procedures in that regard is without merit (see Matter of Hyman v. Cornell Univ. , 82 A.D.3d 1309, 1310, 918 N.Y.S.2d 226 [3d Dept. 2011] ).Contrary to petitioners' additional contention, respondent substantially complied with its procedure......
-
Schwarzmueller v. State Univ. of N.Y. at Potsdam
...or preclude SUNY from denying petitioner credit for the semester in light of the suspension ( see Matter of Hyman v. Cornell Univ., 82 A.D.3d 1309, 1310, 918 N.Y.S.2d 226 [2011] ). Petitioner's remaining arguments do not require extended discussion. Petitioner's due process rights were not ......