FAQ for Attorneys

Main Content

The information provided on this page is intended to assist attorneys who have been asked to serve as an advisor to a student in a student discipline case. We make every effort to update the information in a timely manner, but please be aware that, in any conflict between this information and the Student Disciplinary Procedures, the procedures will prevail. (You may also benefit from reading our Frequently Asked Questions for Advisors.)

Students are expected to speak for themselves in all university disciplinary proceedings. Although a student respondent is entitled to the presence of an advisor of their choosing, the role of that advisor is limited. You may consult with the student quietly in a whisper or exchange written notes with the student, but OSCR staff will communicate directly with the student involved.

The jurisdiction of the Student Code is based on an individual's relationship with the university rather than the geographic location of the offense.

We generally will not delay the discipline of students to accommodate the criminal process. The Director of the Office for Student Conflict Resolution may delay a decision, but only if doing so is in the best interest of the university.

Our process will move forward even if your client does not participate, and we may make a decision in their absence. We encourage all respondents to participate and to say as much as they are comfortable sharing. Even if your client is unwilling to discuss the incident/behavior with us, they may be willing to participate in discussions regarding possible sanctions.

We will not permanently prevent your client from withdrawing with pending disciplinary charges, but our process will continue until the case has been resolved.

No. All student discipline records are subject to lawful subpoenas. This includes tape recordings, written statements, and personal recollections. However, the university has established a procedure to compel testimony, which may preclude the use of incriminating statements in a criminal proceeding. This process is based on the Garrity v. New Jersey decision and is available upon request for your review.

We use the preponderance of the evidence/information standard in all disciplinary decisions.

If you and your client are meeting with a dean in the Office for Student Conflict Resolution, your client is responsible for taking your availability into account when scheduling the appointment. Although the student may call to reschedule an appointment for good cause, repeated rescheduling could lead to a registration hold or a decision being made in your client’s absence.

Top