Brandeis Student Loses Appeal Against School Disciplinary Board

David A. Schaer, a former Brandeis University student who accused the school of unfairly disciplining him for alleged date rape in 1996, lost his appeal in a decision by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts yesterday.

The court ruled Schaer had "failed to state a claim on which relief may be granted." This decision overturned a previous appellate court ruling that had ruled in Schaer's favor.

Schaer claimed Brandeis had breached its "contract" with him when the school didn't follow the disciplinary process as laid out in the student handbook. But the court determined that Brandeis had followed procedure in the areas in which Schaer objected.

The school suspended Schaer for several months and then put him on disciplinary probation for the remainder of his time at Brandeis. A woman undergraduate accused him of raping her while they were spending time together in her room, but Schaer claimed the intercourse was consensual.

This case raised the question of whether universities are bound by what is printed in the student handbook.

The courts treated Schaer v. Brandeis as if the relationship were contractual, but said in its decision that declined to make a formal ruling on the question.

David M. Lipton, Schaer's lawyer, said the relationship between a student and a university is inherently contractual.

"The overwhelming weight of judicial procedure holds that the relation between students and universities is contractual in nature. The terms and conditions of that contract are in the handbook of students," he said.

But Lipton said the state courts have exercised judicial caution.

"No Massachusetts appellate court has squarely said that the relationship between the student and the university is a contract," he said. "They are holding open the possibility that this relationship is not contractual in nature."

Alan C. Kors, a professor of history at the University of Pennsylvania, said the implications of the case would lead to a further watering down of university statutes.

"Universities will seek to revise these student handbooks to make them even more ambiguous," he said.

He said he worries that such allowances give universities the potential to abuse their disciplinary power without legal repercussions.

The decision also has potential significance concerning future cases in which students feel they have been unfairly disciplined by their university.

Alan D. Rose '67, attorney for Brandeis University, said he felt the courts would not try to overrule the mandate of universities.

"The way in which a college interprets its own rules is not going to be second guessed by courts," he said.

"Courts will defer to the decisions of the universities."

Rose said Brandeis's internal checks on the disciplinary system were adequate for making decisions on student disciplinary action and that the school "feels completely vindicated" by the court's decision.