Robert claims the university has breached its contractual obligations when it determined that his academic progress was insufficient. There is no true process provided for determining continuance in the Psychology Doctorate Program. The graduate school handbook does list a timeline or established criteria for dismissing a student from the program. Once a student is admitted to a program, contractual obligations are defined, however terms of that must be defined. Once again this program has no terms provided for dismissal of the program. The bare minimum obligation of these contracts is for the university to act in good faith. Typically, in contract law, the courts defer to the university. Robert failed to meet many of the requirements listed to earn the degree, however there is no clear readmission policy provided. The university breached the contract because there was no language that would have made Robert know he was in danger of being dismissed from the program.
Robert claims he was denied procedural and substantive due process in the decision made by the university. In addressing procedural due process there are two questions that must be answered before moving forward; did the law or policy interfere with a protected interest? And what is the process …show more content…
It is fair to say that the language in the graduate student handbook leaves a great deal to the imagination. The decision dismiss Robert from the program appears to be somewhat of an arbitrary one. The policy overall is very vague and does not truly give the students and idea of what is acceptable and unacceptable as far as academic progress is concerned in the Psychology program. However, there is no right or liberty being taken away. There is no fundamental right to an education or practice a trade therefore no liberty or right was infringed