Expelled UNC student can pursue reinstatement, not money, in federal suit

A federal Appeals Court has ruled that an expelled University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill student cannot seek monetary damages in his lawsuit against the school. The anonymous student can seek to be reinstated and have his record cleared.

The former student challenges the way UNC addressed sexual assault charges against him in 2021.

“Jacob Doe, a student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, was found responsible for two allegations of sexual misconduct against female classmates,” Judge Harvie Wilkinson wrote for a unanimous 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals panel. “As a result, Doe lost his scholarship and was permanently expelled from the entire University of North Carolina system.”

“Doe sued the university and several employees for deprivations of Fourteenth Amendment due process, violations of his rights under Title IX, and a handful of state law claims. The district court largely denied the defendants’ motions to dismiss, allowing Doe’s federal claims and most of his state law claims to advance,” Wilkinson wrote.

“We reverse in part, affirm in part, and dismiss in part,” the judge explained. “Because we hold that the district court erred in rejecting the defendants’ assertions of sovereign and qualified immunity, we reverse the judgment below to the extent it permitted Doe to pursue money damages. But we think the district court properly allowed Doe to seek prospective injunctive relief for the due process violations he alleges.”

Four female students — each identified as Jane Roe — lodged complaints against Doe. Hearings and appeals extended through February 2023, when the university’s Board of Trustees affirmed a decision to expel Doe.

He sued in federal court. “The upshot of Doe’s complaint is that the university and its employees denied him fair and adequate disciplinary proceedings, leading to erroneous outcomes in the Roe 1 and Roe 4 matters and causing serious damage to his education, reputation, and career prospects,” Wilkinson wrote.

“Doe asserted claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for deprivations of Fourteenth Amendment due process, a claim under Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 for an erroneous disciplinary outcome, and a series of claims under North Carolina law,” the appellate decision continued. “He sought compensatory and punitive damages and an injunction vacating the disciplinary findings in the Roe 1 and Roe 4 matters, expunging his disciplinary record, and readmitting him to UNC-CH.”

A trial judge denied UNC officials’ motion to dismiss the case and allowed most of Doe’s claims to move forward.

“We think the district court erred in denying the UNC institutions’ motion to dismiss Doe’s claims against them on sovereign immunity grounds, and neither of Doe’s arguments persuades us to the contrary,” Wilkinson wrote.

That decision precludes Doe from seeking monetary damages. “Because the UNC institutions are entitled to state sovereign immunity, the employee defendants sued in their official capacities are ‘protected from a damages action by the same immunity,’” Wilkinson explained. “But Doe seeks more than just money damages for the due process deprivations he alleges. He also requests three forms of injunctive relief: ‘(i) a vacating of the disciplinary findings and decisions; (ii) expungement of his academic record; and (iii) reinstatement as a student in good standing.’”

“We hold that Doe has alleged a liberty interest sufficient to trigger procedural due process protections,” Wilkinson wrote. “A plaintiff asserting a liberty interest in his reputation must show (1) a stigmatizing statement, (2) some type of dissemination, and (3) some other government action that ‘alters or extinguishes one of his legal rights.’”

“Given the pejorative nature of the alleged misconduct and the severity of the actual sanction imposed, we hold that a sufficient liberty interest has been alleged,” the opinion added.

“We think as well that an erroneous university record of a student’s permanent expulsion for sexual misconduct inflicts an ongoing injury for which the student can seek equitable relief,” Wilkinson wrote.

Judges Steven Agee and Henry Floyd joined Wilkinson’s opinion.

The post Expelled UNC student can pursue reinstatement, not money, in federal suit first appeared on Carolina Journal.