Procedures for Honor Cases and Student Disciplinary Cases Involving Contributory Health Impairments

Signed: September 2, 2025

A. Introduction

These Procedures for Hearings on Contributory Health Impairments (the “Procedures”) apply to University students or former University students against whom an Honor report or University Judiciary Committee (“UJC”) complaint is pending (each, as more particularly defined below, a “Student,” and, collectively, “Students”), where the Honor Committee or UJC has jurisdiction (as described in the By-laws of the Honor Committee or UJC), and where the Student is alleging a Contributory Health Impairment (as defined, below, a “CHI”) or is asserting a Lack of Capacity (as defined, below, a “LC”) to stand for a hearing (in Honor cases) or trial (in UJC cases; hereinafter, “trial” refers to either an Honor hearing or a UJC trial, as applicable). These CHI Procedures establish the method for evaluating a claim of CHI and for assessing whether a Student who establishes a CHI poses a Significant Risk (as defined below) to the University community. The hearing described in these Procedures (the “CHI Hearing” or “Hearing”) provides for evaluation of the alleged CHI and the issue of Significant Risk by experts with professional experience in the evaluation or treatment of the relevant health impairment(s). These Procedures do not inhibit or impair existing authority of University officials to invoke interim suspensions in appropriate cases or to exercise other administrative authority.

It is the responsibility of a Student asserting CHI or LC to be familiar and proceed consistent with these CHI Procedures. Questions about these CHI Procedures should be addressed to the Honor Committee, at 434-924-7602, or to the UJC, at [email protected], as applicable. Students may request reasonable accommodations for a disability in order to fully and effectively participate in a CHI Hearing, as more fully described in Section C below.

B. Definitions

As used in these Procedures, the following terms shall have the meanings indicated:

Associate Vice President of Student Affairs (or “AVP”). The Student Affairs Division’s Associate Vice President overseeing the Policy, Accountability, and Critical Events (“PACE”) unit, or the AVP’s designee, or such other officer or person authorized by the Vice President and Chief Student Affairs Officer to act under these CHI Procedures.
Bylaws. The Bylaws of the Honor Committee or UJC in effect at the time of the conduct that is the subject of the Honor report or UJC complaint in question.
Committee. The University’s Honor Committee or Judiciary Committee, as applicable.
Committee Participant. An individual who may be selected by the relevant Committee to participate in or observe the Hearing on CHI. The Vice Chair for Hearings or Chair of the Honor Committee may select the Committee Participant for the Honor Committee. The Vice Chair for Trials or the Chair of the UJC may select the Committee Participant for the UJC. Neither Committee is required to select a Committee Participant in any Hearing on CHI.
Contributory Health Impairment or “CHI”.

Honor Cases: A health impairment that (i) caused the Student’s judgment to be substantially impaired at the time of the reported conduct such that the Student substantially lacked the ability to discern that the conduct in question might be considered an Honor offense, and/or (ii) caused or significantly contributed to the Student’s commission of such reported conduct, which shall mean that, in the absence of the CHI, a reasonable University student in the same or similar circumstances would not have committed such conduct. As used in this definition, “cause” means a “direct causal connection,” as described in Section C, below.

UJC Cases: A health impairment that caused or significantly contributed to or substantially influenced the conduct charged in a UJC complaint.
Executive Committee. The Executive Committee of the Honor Committee or UJC, as applicable.
Expert Assessment. A written assessment regarding the Student’s alleged CHI, including any relevant history of mental or physical health services or treatment, rendered by a qualified person with relevant professional credentials and knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education in the assessment and treatment of the condition(s) in question.
Hearing, Hearing on CHI, or CHI Hearing. A hearing as described in these Procedures convened to evaluate an alleged CHI and, if appropriate, Significant Risk, and any subsequent hearing convened to re-evaluate the alleged CHI and/or the issue of Significant Risk.
Honor I-Panel. The panel of three Honor Committee members that reviews the findings of an Honor investigation in order to determine whether, by a preponderance of the evidence, an Honor offense was committed. If the I-Panel determines, by a preponderance of the evidence, that an Honor offense was committed, the Student is formally accused and the case moves forward for resolution pursuant to the Bylaws of the Honor Committee. Otherwise, the Honor charges are dropped and the case is dismissed.
Honor I-Log. The written compilation of witness interviews and other evidence that is the result of an Honor investigation.
Lack of Capacity. The Student’s substantial inability to understand the Honor or UJC charges brought against them or to assist in their defense, due to a health impairment.
PACE Staff. Professional staff members within the Policy, Accountability, and Critical Events unit of Student Affairs, or other officials as designated by the Vice President and Chief Student Affairs Officer to act under these procedures.
Panel. The Hearing panel of three persons, including a Chair, selected by the AVP to evaluate the Student’s alleged CHI and, if applicable, Significant Risk as described in Section D below.
Representative. The person, if any, selected by the Student to provide advice and support in connection with the CHI Hearing. A Representative may be any person, including an attorney, who is not a witness in the Hearing. The Student may be accompanied by the Representative at the Hearing, where the Representative may provide support and advice, but may not speak on behalf of the Student or otherwise participate in the Hearing, except as may be requested or permitted by the Panel Chair.
Restrictions. The suspension from the University or from certain University activities, or the other protective actions, conditions, and/or restrictions, collectively, which may be imposed by the Panel upon a Student whom the Panel has determined poses a Significant Risk. Restrictions will be based on an individualized assessment, taking into account the nature, duration, and severity of the established CHI.
Significant Risk. For Honor cases, the likelihood that a Student will, because of a Contributory Health Impairment, commit conduct that would constitute one or more subsequent Acts of Lying, Cheating, or Stealing (as those terms are defined in the Honor Bylaws). For UJC cases, the likelihood that a Student poses a threat to themselves, to the health or safety of other members of the University community, to University property, or to the educational process. Findings on the issue of Significant Risk will be based on an individualized assessment, taking into consideration the nature, duration and severity of the established CHI. In making this assessment, the Panel will consider the testimony of the Student and other witnesses, if any, at the CHI Hearing; the Expert Assessment, if any; the Honor I-Log (for Honor cases); any other records supplied by the Honor Committee or UJC and/or the AVP; other available and relevant medical, psychiatric, and/or psychological information; and any information regarding reasonable accommodations to which the Student is entitled that would mitigate the risk.
Standards of Conduct. The University’s Standards of Conduct adopted by the Board of Visitors.
Student. Any person registered or enrolled at the University as a student, or a former student who seeks to re-enroll with any unresolved or pending Honor report or UJC complaint, or any person applying for readmission when a CHI Hearing is authorized by these Procedures or otherwise approved or requested by the AVP.
Student Affairs. The University’s Division of Student Affairs and its subsidiary units (including PACE).
UJC. The University Judiciary Committee
Vice Chair for Hearings. The Honor Committee’s Vice Chair for Hearings.
Vice Chair for Trials. The UJC’s Vice Chair for Trials.
Vice President. The University’s Vice President and Chief Student Affairs Officer or designee.

C. Request for Hearing on CHI

As used in these CHI Procedures, timeframes and deadlines measured in “days” mean calendar days, unless otherwise specified.

Requesting a Hearing on CHI in UJC Cases.
1. Requests by the Student. A Student charged with violating the Standards of Conduct may make a good faith claim that the Student had a CHI at the time of the alleged offense by submitting the Request for Hearing on Contributory Health Impairment webform. Such a Request must be submitted to the UJC Chair within fourteen (14) calendar days following the date the Student received the UJC complaint, subject to reasonable extension by the UJC Chair for good cause shown. The UJC shall deliver a copy of the complete and timely Request to the AVP, together with copies of any relevant case records created or maintained by the UJC.
2. Referrals Initiated by PACE Staff. PACE Staff may refer a Student to the AVP for evaluation where a Student is charged with violating the Standards of Conduct and PACE Staff determines that there is good cause to believe that the Student had a CHI at the time of the alleged offense. The PACE Staff referral, which shall set forth the circumstances, in the opinion of the PACE Staff, justifying a CHI Hearing, shall be delivered to the AVP, together with copies of any relevant case records created or maintained by the UJC and/or Student Affairs. The AVP will proceed with an Evaluation of a Request for Hearing on CHI as described in Section 4 below.
3. Requests by the UJC. The UJC may refer a case to PACE Staff for evaluation where a Student facing disciplinary charges has not alleged a CHI, but the UJC has good cause to believe that the Student may in fact have had a CHI at the time of the underlying conduct. The UJC’s referral, which shall set forth the circumstances, in the opinion of the UJC, justifying a CHI Hearing, shall be delivered to PACE Staff, together with copies of the UJC’s records relating to the underlying judicial charge(s). PACE Staff will evaluate the case referred by the UJC and will determine whether to refer the case to a Panel under these Procedures. If, in the opinion of PACE Staff, there is good cause to believe that the Student had a CHI at the time of the underlying conduct, the staff member shall make such a referral in the manner set forth in subparagraph (b), above, and the referral shall be considered a referral by PACE Staff for all purposes under these Procedures. If PACE Staff determines that the circumstances do not justify a CHI Hearing, the case shall be returned to the UJC for resolution pursuant to its Bylaws.
Requesting a Hearing on CHI in Honor Cases.
1. Requests by the Student. A request for a Hearing on CHI may be made by a Student at any time after the Student has been informed of the underlying Honor report up to and including the date ten days after the Student has been formally accused by an I-Panel. The request for Hearing on CHI must be submitted via the Request for Hearing on Contributory Health Impairment webform.
2. Requests by the Executive Committee. The Honor Executive Committee may, by majority vote at any time, refer a Student’s case for a Hearing on CHI. Within ten (10) days of such a referral, the Student may decline such referral and elect instead to have the case remain before the Honor Committee for resolution pursuant to its Bylaws. In order to so decline the referral, the Student must notify the Vice Chair for Hearings. If the Student does not decline the referral, the AVP will evaluate the referred case as a Student Request for Hearing on CHI.
Accommodations. The Student may request reasonable accommodations in order to fully and effectively participate in a Hearing on CHI. A Student wishing to request such accommodations is strongly encouraged to make such request in writing to the Honor or UJC Committee or to the AVP at the earliest possible time and, if possible, at least ten (10) days prior to a Hearing on CHI in order to afford the University sufficient time to respond to the request and provide accommodations, as appropriate. Once a request is received, the Student will be connected with the University’s Student Disabilities Access Center (“SDAC”) or the ADA Coordinator, as applicable, to facilitate an interactive discussion to identify appropriate reasonable accommodations and to ensure that agreed-upon reasonable accommodations are provided.
Evaluation of a Request for Hearing on CHI.
1. Expert Assessment. As a condition of proceeding under these Procedures and to enable the AVP to evaluate the Request for Hearing on CHI, the requesting Student shall (i) provide an Expert Assessment, describing the nature, scope, duration, and extent of the condition(s) underlying the Student’s alleged CHI, and (ii) agree to and sign all reasonably requested authorizations allowing the individual who provides an Expert Assessment to communicate with the University. The Expert Assessment shall be delivered to the AVP, and shall reference the Student’s Request for Hearing on CHI. If the Student is unable to obtain an Expert Assessment, it is the Student’s responsibility to promptly notify the AVP and to work with the AVP to obtain an Expert Assessment. The Expert Assessment requirement may be waived by the AVP, provided that other independent and credible evidence exists to support the Student’s Request for Hearing on CHI, as determined in the sole reasonable discretion of the AVP.
2. Requirements for Evaluation by the AVP. Following submission of a completed Request for Hearing on CHI, the Student must satisfy each of the following requirements within fortyfive (45) days from the date of submission of the Request for Hearing on CHI. This deadline may be extended by the AVP, in the AVP’s sole reasonable discretion, for good cause shown. Upon the expiration of the forty-five (45) day period (and any extension granted by the AVP for good cause shown), if any of the following requirements has not been satisfied, the Request for Hearing on CHI will be void, and the matter will be returned to the Honor Committee or UJC for resolution pursuant to its Bylaws.
  1. The Student must schedule an initial interview with the AVP, and the Student must meet with the AVP as scheduled.
  2. The Student must submit an Expert Assessment to the AVP as described in Section 4(a). If the Student is unable to obtain an Expert Assessment, it is the Student’s responsibility to promptly notify the AVP and to work with the AVP to obtain an Expert Assessment within the forty-five (45) day timeframe set forth above.
  3. The Student must promptly provide any additional information or documentation (and/or obtain or complete any requested forms authorizing the release of such information or documentation) that the AVP deems necessary in order to complete an evaluation of the Request for Hearing on CHI. If the AVP determines that additional medical or other healthcare documentation is necessary, the AVP will request such additional documentation, together with an explanation as to why such additional documentation is necessary. Requests by the AVP for medical and other healthcare documentation will be narrowly focused on information deemed necessary by the AVP to support the Student’s Request for Hearing on CHI.
3. AVP’s Decision. Upon the timely satisfaction of each of the foregoing requirements, the AVP will evaluate the Request for Hearing on CHI, as described below, and render a written decision within sixty (60) days, subject to extension for good cause, in the sole reasonable discretion of the AVP.
4. Effect of AVP’s Decision. The AVP will notify the Student, PACE Staff (if applicable), the Vice President, and the relevant Committee Chair, in writing, of the AVP’s decision to grant or to deny the Request for Hearing on CHI. If the Hearing is granted, such notice will state that it is given under these CHI Procedures, will refer to the underlying Honor or UJC charges, and will enclose a copy of these CHI Procedures. If the Hearing is denied, the case will be referred back to the applicable Committee for proceedings pursuant to its Bylaws. The AVP’s decision is final.
5. Admission of “Act” Element of Alleged Honor Offense. As indicated in the CHI Request Form, any Student whose Request for Hearing on CHI has been approved by the AVP shall be deemed to have admitted the “Act” or “Acts” relating to the underlying Honor charges. Such admission(s) shall be deemed to have been made upon delivery to the Student of notice of the AVP’s approval of the Request for Hearing on CHI. In the event that a Student, after having their Request for Hearing approved by the AVP, (a) does not prevail at the resulting Hearing on CHI, or (b) forfeits the Hearing on CHI, as described below, the case shall be referred back to the Honor Committee for resolution pursuant to its Bylaws. The jury panel in any resulting Honor hearing will be informed of the Student’s admission of the underlying Act or Acts, the Student will be precluded from denying that they committed such Act or Acts, and the jury panel’s vote will reflect that the “Act” element of each alleged Honor offense has been satisfied. The Student's right to introduce evidence on the remaining elements of an Honor offense (i.e., “Knowledge” and “Significance”) will not be affected, except that, as provided in the Bylaws, Causal Psychological Evidence (as defined in the Bylaws) will not be admitted. In the event that a Student’s Request for Hearing on CHI is denied by the AVP, the Student will not be deemed to have admitted the “Act” or “Acts” relating to the underlying Honor charges.
6. Scheduling and Forfeiting a Hearing. A Student who fails to cooperate in the process for a Request for Hearing on CHI and/or the scheduling of a CHI Hearing, or who otherwise unduly delays the Hearing or any related proceedings without good cause, may forfeit the opportunity for review under these Procedures, including a Hearing on CHI that has been granted by the AVP. Such cooperation includes responding promptly to phone calls, emails, letters, and other communications directed to the Student or their Representative; making reasonable efforts to accommodate proposed Hearing dates; and working affirmatively and diligently with persons the Student wishes to have present at the Hearing to facilitate their availability for the Panel's consideration. Students should anticipate that the University will make every effort to schedule a Hearing as promptly as possible after a Request for Hearing on CHI has been granted. (The actual date of individual Hearings is necessarily dependent on the total number of Hearing requests that have been granted, and on the academic calendar.) If the AVP reasonably concludes that a Student is not cooperating in scheduling or preparing for a Hearing, or otherwise not cooperating or complying with the requirements of these Procedures, the AVP will so notify the Student, in writing, and the Student will have fourteen (14) days in which to comply with any outstanding requests relating to the Hearing on CHI or related proceedings. After that time, the AVP, in the sole reasonable discretion of the AVP, may determine that the Student has forfeited the Hearing on CHI and return the case to the relevant Committee for resolution pursuant to its Bylaws.
7. The AVP’s Review. The AVP will grant the requested Hearing on CHI if, based on information obtained from the Student or contained in materials submitted to the AVP (including any records provided by the relevant Committee and any Expert Assessment(s)), the AVP determines that the Panel could reasonably conclude that: (i) the alleged CHI existed contemporaneously with the reported offense(s); and (ii) there was a direct causal connection between the alleged CHI and the reported conduct underlying the Honor or UJC charges.
8. Factors Guiding AVP’s Review. While no single factor is decisive, the AVP’s evaluation of a Request for a Hearing on CHI will take into account the following considerations:
  1. Whether the Student has demonstrated a diagnosed medical, psychiatric, or psychological condition that could qualify as a CHI, as defined above, and whether the condition might be found to be of a type and severity to have caused the Student’s judgment to be substantially impaired at the time of the reported offense.
  2. Whether the Student is engaged in an ongoing relationship with one or more health providers, taking into account the details of that history, such as: When was the alleged CHI first diagnosed, and by whom? Did health services or treatment begin prior to the conduct that is the subject of the Honor or UJC charges? If so, when? Were health services or treatment being sought at the time of the commission of such conduct? Were health services or treatment sought after the Student was made aware that an Honor report or UJC complaint had been received?
  3. Whether the Student has presented other independent evidence (witness testimony, academic records/grades, approved accommodations through SDAC, other social/environmental information) documenting a medical, psychiatric, or psychological condition that existed at the time of the reported offense.
9. Hearing Denied. If the Request for Hearing on CHI is denied, the AVP shall so notify the Student, the relevant Committee Chair, and the Vice President, in writing, and the case shall be returned to the relevant Committee for resolution pursuant to its Bylaws.
10. Hearing Granted. If the Request for Hearing on CHI is granted, the AVP shall so notify the Student, the relevant Committee Chair, and the Vice President, in writing. Such notice shall state that it is given under these Procedures, shall refer to the underlying Honor report or UJC complaint, and shall enclose a copy of these Procedures.

D. Hearings and Findings

Hearing Panel; Notification; Documentation.
1. Panel Appointment; Composition. A Panel shall preside over each Hearing under these Procedures. The Vice President shall select the Panel members and shall notify the AVP and Student of the names of the Panel members and of the Panel Chair. The Vice President shall seek to staff the Panel with three persons with appropriate expertise, including psychologists or psychiatrists. Selection of Panel members may be made without any restriction or requirement as to the number of prior Panels on which a panelist has previously served.
2. Notification of Hearing; Copies of Documentary Evidence. The AVP shall notify the Student as soon as possible regarding the date, time, and place of the Hearing. The AVP shall provide the Student a copy of the case materials (including, in Honor cases, the Honor I-Log) to be presented to the Panel not less than five (5) calendar days prior to the Hearing.
3. Evaluations/Reports. In addition to the Expert Assessment supporting the Request for Hearing on CHI, if any, the Student may submit the opinions or recommendations of other licensed healthcare professionals for review by the Panel. If the Student wishes to submit such other opinions or recommendations, the Student shall provide to the AVP a copy of the documents or reports to be so submitted not less than two (2) calendar days prior to the Hearing.
4. Hearing Panel not Bound by Expert Assessment or Other Opinions/ Recommendations. The Hearing Panel will not be bound by the opinions or conclusions set forth in the Expert Assessment or by the opinions or recommendations of other healthcare professionals submitted for or on behalf of the Student.
5. Participation by the Honor Committee or UJC. The Honor Committee or UJC, as applicable, may (but is not required to) designate a Committee Participant.
General Hearing Procedures.
1. Attendees at the Hearing; Role of Representatives and Attorneys. The Student, PACE Staff (if relevant), the Student’s Representative, if any, and the Committee Participant, if any, may attend the Hearing, excluding the Panel’s deliberations, which shall be conducted in private. Witnesses other than the Student and PACE Staff may remain in the Hearing room only while giving their testimony, unless the Panel Chair determines otherwise. The Student and PACE Staff (if relevant) are responsible for arranging the attendance of their respective witnesses at the Hearing. The AVP who granted the Hearing shall also attend the Hearing in an advisory role for the Panel. The Panel may arrange for the presence of a person or persons who may advise it, privately or otherwise. The Panel Chair shall determine the propriety of attendance at the Hearing by any other persons. At the discretion of the Panel Chair, a CHI Hearing may be conducted, testimony received, and witnesses questioned, entirely or in part via video or teleconference.
2. Evidence. The Panel is not bound by the rules of procedure or evidence applicable to judicial proceedings, and may adopt such rules of procedure and evidence that it deems appropriate, allow for flexibility in sequencing, and take into account any evidence it deems relevant, in the sole reasonable discretion of the Panel Chair.
3. Decisions by Majority Vote. All decisions by the Panel shall be made by majority vote.
4. Truthful Testimony. Each witness is expected to testify truthfully and, if a witness is a Student, such testimony will be given on the Student’s honor pursuant to the University’s Honor Code.
5. Burden of Proof of CHI. The burden of proving the existence of the alleged CHI shall be borne by the party requesting the Hearing (i.e., the Student or PACE Staff, as the case may be). If the Student is the requesting party, no PACE staff will be present unless asked by the Panel or Student.
6. Standard of Proof; Preponderance of the Evidence. The party bearing the burden of proof must persuade the Panel of the existence of the alleged CHI by a preponderance of the evidence. A “preponderance of the evidence” means the greater weight of the evidence; that is, to establish a fact by a preponderance of the evidence means to prove that the fact is more likely true than not true, considering the totality of the evidence.
7. Assumption of Admission of “Act” Element (Honor cases). The purpose of the Hearing on CHI is, in significant part, to enable the Panel to make an informed decision regarding the existence of the alleged CHI. In order to make this determination, the Panel (which is not charged with determining whether the alleged conduct meets the criteria of an Honor offense) may assume that the question of whether the Student committed the reported conduct underlying the Honor charges (i.e., committed the “Act” or “Acts” charged) is not in dispute.
8. Opening Statements; Witness Testimony; Documentary Evidence; Questions. The Student and PACE Staff (if applicable) may make opening statements at the beginning of the Hearing, and closing statements at the end of the Hearing. The party bearing the burden of proof may make the first opening statement and a rebuttal opening statement, and shall first present any witnesses, documents, and other relevant evidence. The responding party, if any, shall then have the opportunity to present relevant evidence. Additional evidence may be presented in the sole, reasonable discretion of the Panel Chair. The parties may question witnesses upon the completion of each witness’s initial testimony. Panel members may question witnesses at any time. Documents and other exhibits offered shall be marked and, when received in evidence by the Panel, made a part of the Hearing record. The AVP and Committee Participant may provide information upon request of the Panel Chair or Parties with Panel Chair approval.
9. Continuances. The Panel Chair may continue the Hearing from time to time, provided that the Hearing will be completed within ten (10) days of its commencement, unless the parties agree otherwise or the Panel decides otherwise, in writing, for good cause, in its sole, reasonable discretion. Once the Hearing has been completed, it may be reopened by the Panel at any time before the Panel renders its written decision, as described below.
10. Recordings and Transcripts. The Panel will make its best efforts to arrange for the Hearing to be accurately recorded and will arrange for transcription of the recording upon request by a party or if the Panel deems transcription appropriate. Such recording and transcription may be made by any person(s), including University employees, that the Panel may designate and such persons will ensure the confidentiality of the information transcribed.
Findings of the Panel on CHI and Significant Risk.
1. Determination of Existence of CHI. In the initial Hearing, the Panel shall first determine whether the alleged CHI has been established, by a preponderance of the evidence, as described above.
  1. If the Panel determines that the CHI has not been established by a preponderance of the evidence, the Panel will refer the case back to the relevant Committee for resolution pursuant to its Bylaws.
  2. If the Panel determines that the CHI has been established by a preponderance of the evidence, the underlying Honor charges or UJC complaint will be considered resolved and the Panel shall next consider whether the Student’s presence at the University poses (or, where a Student is seeking readmission following suspension or withdrawal, would pose) a Significant Risk. (In cases where the underlying conduct caused loss or damage to the property of another person, the Panel may refer the Student and/or the aggrieved party [if they are a Student] to Student Affairs for advice and consultation about the possibility of arranging for restitution.)
2. Determination of Significant Risk; Restrictions.
  1. If the Panel determines that the Student does not pose a Significant Risk, the Panel will not impose Restrictions of any kind. The Panel may, however, make recommendations to the Student regarding treatment and such recommendations may also be filed with PACE and Care and Support Services. PACE Staff may follow up with the Student to ascertain whether the Student has acted on those recommendations and to provide support to the Student.
  2. If the Panel determines that the student does pose (or would, upon readmission, pose) a Significant Risk, the Panel shall impose Restrictions, as appropriate, in order to protect the Student and/or the University community. A Restriction involving suspension (or the continuation of a suspension previously imposed) shall be issued and enforced through a registration block, and other appropriate administrative measures, by Student Affairs.
    
    Restrictions may also include conditions to be satisfied in order for the Student to remain enrolled at the University, if applicable, or in order to request re-evaluation by the Panel, at a subsequent Hearing, on the issue of Significant Risk. Such conditions may include, among others, the lapse of a stated period of time; the requirement that a Student initiate or continue regular relationship(s) with certain healthcare providers; the requirement that a Student abstain from using certain substances and/or submit to periodic or random testing for such substances; the requirement that the Student meet regularly, as requested, with a designated a University official (e.g., PACE); and/or the requirement that the Student’s healthcare provider(s) submit an updated written assessment describing the Student’s treatment and progress since the initial Hearing and, in the opinion of the assessor, whether or not the student, if readmitted, would continue to pose a Significant Risk.
    
    Upon the satisfaction of the Restrictions, if applicable, a Panel may convene to re-evaluate the issue of Significant Risk; may lift or modify some or all of the Restrictions; and, in appropriate cases, may grant permission for the Student to seek re-enrollment at the University.
    
    The effective date and termination date, if applicable, of the Restrictions shall be in the sole, reasonable discretion of the Panel. A notice of all Restrictions shall be filed with PACE, the AVP, and the Vice President. The relevant Committee Chair shall be informed of the outcome of the proceedings by the Panel.
Panel Decision; Hearing Records.
1. Panel Decision. The Panel will announce its decision at the end the Hearing (or, if the Hearing is continued, at the end of the continued Hearing), unless it determines, in the discretion of the Panel Chair, that it needs additional time to come to a decision on the issue of CHI or Significant Risk. In addition, the Panel will prepare a written decision letter that specifies its findings and conclusions, in detail. The decision letter also will specify any Restrictions imposed by the Panel, including their respective effective date(s) and duration, if applicable. The Panel will endeavor to provide a copy of its written decision to the Student, PACE staff (if applicable), the relevant Committee Chair, the AVP, and the Vice President as soon as reasonably practicable following the conclusion of the Hearing.
2. Records. The Panel shall retain in confidence all records relating to Hearings on CHI, as shall the Office of the Vice President, the AVP, PACE Staff, and the relevant Committee Vice Chair for Hearings/Trials, and shall make no public disclosure except where disclosure is required or permitted by law.
3. Decisions by the Panel Without Convening a Hearing. In unusual cases, the Panel may elect to evaluate a claim of CHI without convening a Hearing where,
  1. the Panel has received copies of the Student’s academic, Honor (if applicable), disciplinary (if applicable), health, or other relevant records, and such records are deemed sufficient, without more, to evaluate the issues of CHI and, if applicable, Significant Risk, and
  2. the Panel concludes that either (1) significant passage of time has made convening a Hearing impossible, impractical, or unnecessary, or (2) in re-evaluating the issue of Significant Risk or the continued necessity of Restrictions, the Panel is able to determine on the record submitted that the Student does not pose a Significant Risk or that such Restrictions should be lifted.

E. Appeals to the Judicial Review Board

Time for Appeal. The Student may appeal the Panel’s decision(s) by so notifying the Chair of the University’s Judicial Review Board (the “JRB”), in writing, within ten (10) days following receipt of the Panel’s written decision, subject to extension for good cause in the sole, reasonable discretion of the JRB Chair.
Form of Appeal; Arguments; Consultation with Panel. The Student’s notice to the JRB Chair shall include any arguments in support of the Student’s position and, if relevant, the Student’s proposed alternative(s) to any Restrictions imposed by the Panel. The JRB Chair may afford the Student, PACE Staff (if applicable) and the Panel an opportunity to present written arguments in support of their respective positions on the appeal. The JRB Chair may impose any reasonable time and length limitations on such written presentations. In evaluating the appeal, the JRB Chair may question the Panel members about their decision and may obtain and review any or all of the Hearing transcripts and exhibits.
Decision on Appeal. The JRB Chair will evaluate whether the Panel’s decisions are reasonably supported by evidence in the record and, if so, shall affirm the Panel’s decisions. If the JRB Chair concludes that the Panel’s decisions are not reasonably supported by evidence in the record, the JRB Chair may direct the Panel to reopen its Hearing and receive additional evidence, or the JRB Chair may consult with the Vice President to appoint a new Panel to consider the case de novo.
JRB Chair’s Decision Final. The JRB Chair shall provide to the Student, PACE Staff (if applicable), the AVP, the Panel Chair, and the Vice President a written decision on the appeal in as timely a fashion as the JRB Chair’s schedule can accommodate. This decision is final and may not be appealed.

F. Procedures for Claims of Lack of Capacity

Assertion of LC.
1. Timing and Process for Asserting LC. A Student may assert that they lack the capacity to stand trial (“Assertion of LC”) prior to the commencement of an Honor hearing or UJC trial. The Assertion of LC must be made via the Assertion of Lack of Capacity and Acknowledgement of Suspension from the University webform, which will be submitted to the Honor Vice Chair for Hearings or the UJC Vice Chair for Trials, as applicable. The respective Vice Chair shall forward a copy of the LC Form to the AVP.
2. Consultation with the AVP. Serious consequences attach to the Assertion of LC and the resulting avoidance of the Honor hearing or UJC trial process. Moreover, Students considering such a choice may, by definition, be in an impaired condition. For these reasons, in order to assert LC, Students must meet with the AVP to discuss the decision and the resulting suspension from the University, and the AVP must confirm that such meeting occurred by signing the LC Form. The AVP may consult with the University’s department of Counseling and Psychological Services, with a mental health specialist treating the Student, or with others who might have relevant input to assist the AVP in this consultation.
Consequences of Assertion of LC.
1. Suspension from the University. An Assertion of LC involves a claim that a serious health impairment compromises a Student’s fundamental functioning so as to make their participation in an Honor hearing or UJC trial impossible. For this reason, a Student making this claim will be deemed to pose a Significant Risk, mandating immediate suspension from the University. Students will not be allowed to complete classes if such suspension occurs mid-semester. Such suspension shall be noted on the Student’s record as: “Suspension Pending Elimination of Risk and Resolution of Conduct Charges.”
2. Procedures for Return to the University. Suspension for LC shall only be removed if and when:
  1. The Student files a written Request for Conditional Return to Stand Trial, via the Request for Conditional Return for Trial or Hearing webform and
  2. The Student returns for their Honor hearing or UJC trial.

G. Notices

All notices to be given under these Procedures shall be deemed to have been given (a) to the Student, when sent to the Student’s “Primary Email Address,” as outlined in the University Undergraduate or Graduate Record; (b) to PACE Staff, the AVP, or the Vice President, when delivered to their respective regular University offices; and (c) to all other persons, upon actual receipt by or personal delivery to the person intended, or three (3) days after mailing by U.S. mail to the person’s address of record, whichever shall first occur.

H. Amendments

These Procedures may be amended at any time, in writing, by mutual agreement of the Honor Committee, the UJC, and the Vice President (acting on behalf of the President of the University). Representatives of the Executive Committees, the AVP, the Vice President, and the Office of University Counsel will make reasonable efforts to meet for the purpose of reviewing and, if appropriate, revising these CHI Procedures, at such intervals as they may deem appropriate. The parties to such meetings may consult with other University subject-matter experts, as appropriate. The Vice President is authorized to implement and clarify these Procedures and, with approval of University Counsel, authorize exceptions or deviations subject to compliance with the fundamental fairness guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. The procedures applicable to a particular Student will be these CHI Procedures, as amended through the date on which the relevant Honor report or UJC complaint is filed.

Electronically signed:

Thomas Ackleson
Honor Committee Chair
8/27/2025

Allison McVey
UJC Chair
9/2/2025

Kenyon Bonner
Vice President and Chief Student Affairs Officer
9/2/2025

Search

May we suggest?