Thursday, January 28, 2010
In Flores v. NYU, __Misc. 3d___(N.Y. Co. Nov. 30, 2009), the court upheld the dismissal of a student from dental school for cheating. As the court explained:
Here, the court finds that NYUCD’s decision must be upheld because the
College substantially complied with its own Code, and its determination was
rationally based after consideration of all the evidence before it. While Petitioner
disputes that he explicitly admitted to cheating on a quiz, Petitioner himself states
in the petition that he “admitted to briefly glancing at another student’s quiz 011 a
single occasion.” Whilc Petitioner maintains that this was inadvcrtent - and was in
fact the product of his ADHD - Petitioner’s facially plausible explanation does not
render NYUCD’s contrary finding (ie., that Petitioner looked at the student’s quiz
to obtain answers) unreasonable or arbitrary. Accordingly, the court cannot disturb
NYUCD’s findings of fact and assessments of witness credibility (see Ehert v.
Yeshiva Univ., 28 A.D.3d 3 15, 3 16 [lst Dcpt. 20061). Finally, where Petitioner was
found to have cheated on a quiz, the court cannot conclude that the penalty of
expulsion was so disproportionate to the offense as to shock thc conscience.
This case demonstrates how courts pay extreme deference to decisions of university administrators.
Mitchell H. Rubinstein