Tedeschi v. Wagner College
49 N.Y.2d 652
Court of Appeals
Decided: April 1, 1980
Implications For Students Filing Article 78 Petitions To Have Courts Review Expulsion And Rescission Decisions By A University
ISSUE
In reviewing an institution’s decision to suspend or expel a student, whether the same good faith standard applied to academic-related determinations also apply to nonacademic determinations.
Future Article 78 Petitions To Review University Actions To Rescind Or Expel Students Will Hold University To A Higher Standard
HOLDING
The Court of Appeals held that, where a student has been removed or suspended from a university or college for a reason unrelated to academics, a higher standard is applied in reviewing the determination; the institution must adhere to its own rules and policies.
FACTS
In 1976, Nancy Jean Tedeschi was admitted to Wagner College. During the fall semester, Ms. Tedeschi’s academic performance began to decline and her behavior became disruptive. In December of that year, Ms. Tedeschi went to take an exam but ripped it up in frustration and walked out. Her professor advised her that she would fail the class without a score. In response to the professor’s warning, Ms. Tedeschi bombarded him with phone calls and at one point showed up at the professor’s residence.
The following January, Wagner’s academic dean contacted Ms. Tedeschi and her mother to arrange a meeting to discuss her academic standing. Ms. Tedeschi’s mother refused to speak with school officials and demanded they address the issue in the form of a letter. The next day, the academic dean advised Ms. Tedeschi that she was suspended because of her bad character and consistent disruptive behavior in class. Ms. Tedeschi then met with the academic dean, the dean of students and the president’s assistant. Thereafter, Ms. Tedeschi was notified she would be withdrawn from classes for the remainder of the year but could reapply the following year.
Ms. Tedeschi filed a lawsuit against Wagner College, claiming she had not afforded a hearing or opportunity to defend herself and that, as a result, she was arbitrarily frustrated in completing her education. The trial court held that the school was only required to act in good faith and the court was not in a position to review Wagner’s decision to suspend Ms. Tedeschi. The Appellate Division affirmed, and the plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeals.
New Standard For Article 78 Petitions Challenging University Decisions To Rescind Or Expel Students And How Those Cases Should Be Analyzed
ANALYSIS
Although Tedeschi v. Wagner stems from a lawsuit, it set the standard in determining when, by way of an Article 78 petition, courts should intervene in a college or university’s decision to suspend or expel a student. Courts have historically deferred to a university’s decision to suspend or expel a student for academic reasons, as long as the institution acted in good faith. (See Matter of Olsson v. Board of Higher Educ., 49 N.Y.2d 408, 426 [1980]). As explained in Olsson, provided the decision was made in good faith and was not arbitrary or irrational, matters involving academic standards do not generally warrant court intervention because those decisions are best determined by academic officials. On the other hand, decisions based on nonacademic reasons call for stricter judicial scrutiny, as those decisions are “quite closely akin to the day-to-day work of the judiciary.”
Here, the student was not suspended based on her failing grades but, rather, for her disruptive behavior. Because the school’s decision was based on nonacademic matters, the Court held, the college could not circumvent its written policies and procedures with regard to student removal. A closer look at Wagner College’s guidelines revealed that Ms. Tedeschi was entitled to a hearing by a Student-Faculty Hearing Board and review of the board’s findings by the school’s president.
Wagner College argued that Ms. Tedeschi’s meetings with the deans and the president’s assistant were sufficient compliance with the school’s policy. However, the Court recognized that, regardless of any intentions to be fair, they were “no acceptable substitute for a hearing board composed of both students and faculty.”
Nonacademic decisions for suspension or expulsion, therefore, warrant a higher standard of review for Article 78 petitions involving academia. Courts must ensure the institution acted in accordance with its own policies and procedures to safeguard students’ rights to be afforded a fair opportunity to defend themselves when facing a consequence that will deprive them of their education.