Higher Education Roundtable

June 1, 2011

Litigation UpdateHosted by 

Hobart and William Smith Colleges

Presented by  Julia Green Sewruk, Esq. 

&Theresa A. Conroy, Esq.

Defamation

•

Website created a list of “100 Most Dangerous Schools”

based 

on an undisclosed algorithm using data reported pursuant to 

Clery

Act 

Claimed that the schools on the list “have the most dangerous 

reputations for crime in the United States”

School rankings shifted up and down seemingly at random

Website included following comments on “Safety Page”:  Hobart 

& William Smith Colleges (HWS) “is a very dangerous place to be 

enrolled at [sic]”

•

Website assured readers that information was up‐to‐date, 

objective, and unbiased

•

Attorneys tried to work through website host, but host would 

not disclose owner/content manager

•

Submitted complaint through website contact screen•

Response from website including posting our rebuttal on HWS 

Safety Page

Defamation

Practical Considerations for Defamation

•

Regularly comb the internet for references to your institution•

Defamation is ultimately very difficult to prove, but it is 

worthwhile to be proactive and aggressive at the outset•

Probably most effective to discredit the website or publication 

and use affirmative public relations to contradict defamatory 

remarks

Race in Admissions

•

University of Texas (UT) experienced low numbers of 

matriculated minority students

•

State of Texas adopted a Top Ten Percent Law, guaranteeing 

admission to high school seniors in top 10% of their class

•

After U.S. Supreme Court decision in Grutter

v. Bollinger, UT 

conducted two studies to determine if a critical mass of 

minorities were enrolling; prepared a report on the 

institutional benefits of diversity

Study “expressed concern that UT appeared ‘largely closed to 

nonwhite applicants’

and did not ‘provide a welcoming 

supportive environment’

for minority students”

Stated goal was to “produce graduates who are capable of 

fulfilling the future leadership needs of Texas”

Concluded that UT had not met critical mass needed to obtain full 

educational benefits of diversity

Race in Admissions

•

After applying Top Ten Percent Law, about 20% of spots 

remained for admission to freshman class

•

UT adopted admissions policy with two tier system: 

Academic Index

Personal Achievement Index: considered race as one factor among many, 

none of which were given numerical weight

•

Court held that it was permissible to seek “critical mass”: 

“defined by reference to the educational benefits that diversity 

is designed to produce”

•

Even though facially neutral, Top Ten Percent Law troubled the 

Court; it had also dramatically increased enrollment of minority

students.  Thus, the TTP law might speed elimination of 

necessity of using race as a factor to achieve critical mass

•

Court found that, overall, decision to consider race in 

admissions was deliberate and studied, therefore in good faith

Fisher, et al. v. University of Texas at Austin, 631 F.3d 213 (5th Cir. Jan. 18, 2011)

Practical Considerations for Race in Admissions

•

Measures must be narrowly tailored to the interest  at stake

“[A] university admissions program is narrowly tailored 

only if it allows for individualized consideration of 

applicants of all races”

•

Race or ethnicity can be considered as a plus factor  in a highly individualized analysis of each student’s  potential contribution to diversity at the institution,  which may derive from

factors unrelated to race or 

ethnicity 

Practical Considerations for Race in Admissions

•

Quotas for minority students are not acceptable•

All race‐conscious measures must have a “logical 

end point”•

Must be able to demonstrate a well‐supported and 

institution‐specific determination that achieving  diversity is a compelling interest; mission statement 

and institutional mores should reflect a true  commitment to achieving diversity 

•

Must also make a serious and good faith effort to  consider using alternate, ethnicity‐neutral factors  that could achieve the same diversity objectives

•

Institutional goals need not be compromised•

These restrictions are applicable to public and

private institutions

Practical Considerations for Race in Admissions

•

Geography•

Socioeconomic status•

Age •

Religion •

Parental educational 

attainment •

First in family to attend 

college•

Household income•

Citizenship

•

Special talents•

English as second language/ 

proficiency in foreign 

languages•

Graduation from a particular 

high school•

Overcoming educational 

obstacles or other 

disadvantages•

Academic interests

Alternative Diversity Factors

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Achieving

Diversity: Race‐Neutral 

Alternatives in American Education, Washington, D.C. (2004). 

Equity in Athletics/Title IX Compliance

•

Quinnipiac University (QU) proposed to cut its women’s varsity 

volleyball team and planned to add varsity cheerleading

•

Court held that:

QU’s

competitive cheerleading team did not qualify as varsity sport for 

purposes of Title IX

Acceptable that QU required all women cross‐country runners to 

participate in indoor/outdoor track, but QU impermissibly counted 

women runners who did not truly participate (red‐shirted or injured 

during indoor/outdoor seasons)

“Roster management”

(above‐average roster targets for women’s team 

and below‐average roster targets for men’s team) was ok

•

However, 3.62% disparity in percentage of women given 

genuine athletic participation opportunities and percentage of 

women enrolled violated Title IX because the shortage was 38 

women, sufficient to sustain an independent varsity team QU 

did not offer

Courts have recognized a substantial proportionality safe harbor

of 2%

Biediger, et al. v. Quinnipiac University, 728 F. Supp. 2d 62 (D. Conn. July 21, 2010)

Practical Considerations for Equity in Athletics/ Title IX Compliance

•

Three different tests may be used to determine whether university 

satisfies obligation to “effectively accommodate the interests and 

abilities of members of both sexes,”

the first of which is provision of 

athletic participation opportunities proportionate to enrollment

•

Two‐part test to determine whether school is providing substantially

proportionate athletic participation opportunities

Athletic participation opportunity only counted if it affords a genuine 

opportunity to participate in an NCAA‐

or National Association of 

Intercollegiate Athletics‐recognized sport, meaning that experience is of a 

quality similar to experience of other varsity athletes• Federal government in Biediger: “‘look behind [the] numbers’

and 

examine the quality of opportunities being offered.”

Compare percentage of athletic participation opportunities provided to 

women with percentage of women enrolled• If there is a disparity consider whether shortage is sufficient to sustain 

an independent varsity team not currently offered

Student Entitlement to Reasonable Accommodation•

Masters of Social Work student with multiple sclerosis who used a 

wheelchair failed to complete agency externship as required by 

curriculum

•

Plaintiff argued that her proposed modification of working from home 

under remote supervision of agency and participating as a social

worker at groups unrelated to agency (AA meetings) was reasonable 

accommodation

•

Court deferred to school’s “genuine academic decision”

Plaintiff offered only her own opinion that she was a qualified individual  

and that her proposed modification would satisfy the academic program

•

Court concluded that student’s proposed modification was not 

reasonable given that it was a fundamental alteration to the program

Purpose of program was to observe and engage with the agency’s staff 

and clients

Klene

v. The Trustees of Indiana University, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 6024 (7th Cir. March 23, 2011)

Practical Considerations for Reasonable Accommodation •

Standard for reasonable accommodation:

With reasonable accommodation, individual could perform the 

essential functions of the job

In student context, the issue is whether school reasonably 

accommodated the disability, and if so, whether the student was 

otherwise qualified to be a student

•

A "qualified individual with a disability" under the ADA or 

Section 504, is one who:

with or without reasonable modifications to rules, policies, or 

practices, the removal of architectural, communication, or 

transportation barriers, or the provision or auxiliary aids and 

services, meets the essential eligibility requirements for …

participation in programs or activities provided by a public entity.  

42 U.S.C. §

12131(2) (emphasis supplied).

Melendez v. DeVry

Corp., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31384 (E.D.N.Y. 2005)

Practical Considerations for Reasonable Accommodation

•

Carefully consider whether requested accommodation would 

result in a “fundamental alteration to the program”

and be 

prepared to articulate that “fundamental alteration”

•

Document decision and rely on grounds that reflect “genuine 

academic decision”

Work-related Stress as a Basis for Workers’ Compensation Benefits•

Plaintiff was terminated three months after he stepped into 

role as Chief of University Police for Alfred State College

•

Filed for workers’

compensation benefits, claiming that, in days 

immediately prior to termination, he suffered “recurrence of 

[PTSD], [irritable bowel syndrome] and anxiety”

•

Filed another claim two months later on grounds that the 

manner in which he was informed of termination exacerbated 

pre‐existing psychological conditions

•

Appealed denial of application for benefits and full Board 

review

•

Plaintiff had history of claims of stress related to work and had 

exhibited signs of “delusional thinking and paranoia”

•

No evidence presented that Chief of Police position was 

extraordinarily stressful or that claimed injuries caused by 

conditions that existed in the work place

Work-related Stress as a Basis for Workers’ Compensation Benefits

•

Legal standard:

“A mental injury, even if job related, is not compensable if it is ‘a 

direct consequence of a lawful personnel decision involving a 

disciplinary action, work evaluation, job transfer, demotion, or

termination taken in good faith by the employer.’”

WCL §

2(7).

•

The Court also rejected plaintiff’s claim that the  stress of the job exacerbated his preexisting mental 

condition:

“Such a claim will not ‘be sustained absent a showing that the 

stress experienced by the affected claimant was greater than that 

which other similarly situated workers experienced in the normal

work environment.’”

Witkowich

v. SUNY Alfred State College, 80 A.D.3d 1099, 914 N.Y.S.2d 796 (3d Dept. Jan. 27, 2011)

Practical Considerations for Claims of Work- Related Stress•

Keep a good record of all inappropriate or suspect behavior, 

including formal complaints and even observations•

Termination decisions should track the language of WCL 

section 2(7) to show that the decision was “a direct 

consequence of a lawful personnel decision involving a 

disciplinary action, work evaluation, job transfer, demotion, or

termination taken in good faith by the employer”•

Be prepared to substantiate argument that stress of job at 

issue is not “greater than that which other similarly situated 

workers experienced in the normal work environment”

Enforceability of Charitable Pledges

•

Plaintiff Foundation sought a declaration of conditions and 

restrictions to pledges that were not stated or suggested in 

written and executed gift commitment and endowment 

agreements

•

Court held that “As with contracts generally, when the pledge 

is made in writing, unless conditions are expressed, or at least

implicit, in the agreement itself, parol

evidence may not be 

used to supply them except to show conditions precedent to 

the effectiveness of the agreement”

•

Defendant St. Bonaventure University also recovered $900K in 

outstanding pledges toward a library expansion because it was 

pledged in an unambiguous written agreement and the school 

relied on it when securing additional pledges and constructing 

the expansion

The Paul and Irene Bogoni

Foundation v. St. Bonaventure University, 78 A.D.3d 616, 913 N.Y.S.2d 154 (1st Dept. Nov. 30, 2010).

Practical Considerations for Charitable Pledges

•

Discuss all conditions or restrictions explicitly•

Obtain signed, explicit gift commitment or 

endowment agreement for all pledges•

Document your reliance on the pledges/create 

paper trail of reliance

Architect Malpractice

•

Architect and National Labor College, Inc. (NLC) entered into a 

written contract for a new, two‐story multi‐purpose building 

with classroom facilities, kitchen/dining facilities, conference

rooms, and retail areas•

Peer review of plans revealed problems with the design, bids 

came in well over architect’s budget, plans did not comply with 

government codes, and there were numerous design defects 

and problems during construction, which took ten months after 

projected “substantial completion”

date•

NLC sued, alleging negligence/malpractice for failure to use the

degree of skill, care, judgment or expertise required of a 

professional architect, as well as breach of contract

Architect Malpractice

•

The court noted that a plaintiff cannot recover in  tort unless there is a breach of a duty independent 

of the contract; otherwise, economic loss rule bars  tort claims and only recovery is in contract

•

The court denied architect’s motion to dismiss  negligence claim even though NLC did not identify 

source of duty outside of contract; it was sufficient  that NLC alleged it engaged architect to perform 

professional services, which generally gives rise to  such a duty

National Labor College, Inc. v. The Hillier Group Architecture New Jersey, Inc., 739 F. Supp. 2d 821 (D. Md. Sept. 14, 2010)

Practical Considerations for Architect Malpractice

•

New York recognizes the same “economic loss”

rule:  if there is a contract, then a party cannot sue for 

negligence or malpractice unless there is a duty  independent of the contract

•

“Architects who violate their professional duty can  be sued by clients in both contract and tort”

Carmania

Corp., N.V. v. Hambrecht Terrell Int’l, 705 F. Supp. 936, 938‐39 n.3, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18314 

*6 n.3 (S.D.N.Y. 1989) (citation omitted)

•

However, there is only a slim likelihood of recovery  in tort when the parties have a contract; must have  personal injury or property damage separate from 

contract

The Interplay of FERPA and FOIA

•

The Chicago Tribune submitted a FERPA request to the University of 

Illinois (UI) under state FOIA statute, seeking disclosure of information 

related to “Category I”

individuals, which included relatives of certain 

influential individuals to determine if they were accorded any 

preferential treatment.

•

UI’s Board of Trustees denied request, relying on state law FOIA 

exemption prohibiting disclosure of “information specifically 

prohibited from disclosure by federal or State law.”

UI relied on this FERPA provision: “No funds shall be made available under any 

applicable program to any educational agency or institution which has a policy or 

practice of permitting the release of education records (or personally identifiable 

information contained therein…) of students without the written consent of their 

parents to any individual, agency or organization.”

20 U.S.C. §

1232g(b)(1).•

Court held that this provision of FERPA did not prohibit UI from

doing 

anything; does not impose any requirement on state officials

“The state has the option to choose whether or not to accept FERPA’s

conditions”•

Narrow decision, not intended to discount potential privacy interests 

implicated by the FOIA request

Chicago Tribune Company v. University of Illinois, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33440 (N.D. Ill. March 7, 2011)

Practical Considerations for FERPA and FOIA

•

Always consider whether FERPA is a basis for resisting 

disclosure pursuant to FOIA •

Rely on FERPA provision that prohibits disclosure rather than 

conditions receipt of funds

Legislative Update

•

New legislation introduced in New York to extend  reach of FOIL to “any not‐for‐profit corporation, 

foundation, alumni association, or limited liability  corporation that is created, controlled or affiliated  with any state agency, including the State University 

of New York”•

This could make many types of information publicly 

available, such as emails by professors

Regulatory Update•

OCR guidance on sexual assault investigations

April 4, 2011 Dear Colleague Letter

Available at Department of Education website > OCR 

Reading Room > Documents Title IXhttp://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague‐201104.html

•

NACUA website

Legal reference service > NACUA Resource Pages > Sexual 

Harassmenthttp://www.nacua.org/lrs/NACUA_Resources_Page/SexualHarassment.asp

•

Interest in this as a Fall 2011 Roundtable topic?

Thank you for attending!

ABOUT Our Firm

Colleagues you can rely on. At Harter Secrest & Emery, our 140+ attorneys and nearly 40 practice areas provide the depth and breadth of legal talent and experience necessary to achieve exceptional results for our local, regional and national clients. At the same time, you can rely on our commitment to accessibility and responsiveness that fosters true partnership. Founded in 1893, Harter Secrest & Emery LLP has offices in Rochester, Buffalo and Albany, New York; and in Naples, Florida.

Areas of Expertise The firm is organized into multiple areas of legal expertise. Attorneys in these areas are experts in: corporate law, securities, intellectual property, banking and finance, labor, litigation, education, non-profit, environmental, real estate, trusts and estates, and immigration, among others. In addition, there are cross-disciplinary practice areas such as our health care and telecommunications practices that serve the needs of specific industries.

Clients We work closely with major international corporations, closely held businesses, banks, real estate developers, manufacturers, retailers, integrated health systems, nursing homes, railroads, telecommunication companies, and a number of professional sports teams. We are general counsel to a growing number of companies involved in such high-tech areas as lasers, optics, digital imaging, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, and the Internet.

We are proud to represent many individuals, insurance companies, municipalities, schools, colleges, not-for-profit and charitable organizations.

Communities Our attorneys hold leadership positions in the American Bar Association as well as state and local bar associations, and serve as officers or trustees of many civic, professional, and public benefit organizations. We are committed to making each community in which we reside a better place to live, encouraging each of our attorneys to play an active role in shaping the future of our communities.

Our Commitment HSE is defined by its exacting legal standards and our collegial, collaborative and integrated approach. While HSE is divided into numerous practice areas, we seamlessly integrate delivery of legal services through a true team approach. You benefit from access to the right talent for the right job, yielding top quality, cost-effective legal counsel and advocacy. At HSE, we strive to be a true team delivering superior legal services and attentive counsel. We expect you to be discerning and exacting and rely on us to share your interests, provide sound legal advice, and anticipate challenges before they arise. We are committed to exceeding your expectations.

hselaw.com

Practice Area Higher Education

Colleges and universities are unique entities – they serve the public, solve pressing societal needs, prepare people for our country's future, provide housing for students, employ thousands of individuals in systems that provide for significant employment protection, play a vital role in local and regional economies and build and maintain infrastructures.

They are also subjected to significant and increasing federal, state and local regulation. Legal issues arise across the full range of disciplines including board governance, tax, labor and employment, environmental, immigration, faculty tenure, academic affairs, security, privacy, student affairs, real estate, financing, and litigation. Moreover, the legal issues facing higher education can quickly change. Less than a decade ago, the pressing legal issues on college campuses were far different than they are today.

The attorneys in our Higher Education Practice Area have extensive experience serving the numerous and ever changing needs of academic institutions from day to day operations to complex legal challenges to policy and planning. Our higher education team devotes itself to legal matters unique to higher education institutions. We represent independent and public colleges and universities and other organizations involved in higher education. Our attorneys address nearly every aspect of law pertinent to higher education. Our team includes attorneys with experience in higher education matters not only at Harter Secrest & Emery but as college administrators, trustees and leaders of education associations. We know higher education from the inside.

Our Clients Private colleges and universities

Public colleges and universities

Our Experience Board Governance Licensure and Accreditation

Bond and Other Financing Transactions Litigation and Litigation Management

Business Transactions Planned Giving

Civil Rights Privacy

Computing Real Estate

Development Student Affairs

Distance Education Student Aid

Employee Benefits Taxation

Endowment Technology Transfer

Environmental

Faculty Tenure

Faith-Based Institutions

Immigration

Intellectual Property

International Programs/Initiatives

Labor and Employment

hselaw.com