×
  • Home
  • About
    • Firm Overview
    • Experience
    • Fraternal Law Conference
    • Conference Sponsorship
  • Our Attorneys
    • Overview
    • Timothy M. Burke
    • Sean P. Callan
    • John E. Christopher
    • Amy M. Hebbeler
    • Patrick K. Hogan
    • Micah E. Kamrass
    • Ilana L. Linder
    • Jacklyn D. Olinger
    • Jacob W. Purcell
    • Jeffrey C. Sun
  • Practice Areas
    • Overview
    • Real Estate and Housing
    • Tax
    • Employment Issues
    • Corporate Governance
    • Grant-Making
    • Litigation
    • Risk Management & Hazing
    • Fundraising & Stewardship
    • State Registration for Greek Foundations
  • Client Resources
  • Anti-Hazing
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
    • Join Our Newsletter
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Instagram
  • Newsletter

The health and safety of our employees, customers and communities are our top priority. Read about our response to COVID-19.

  • Home
  • About
    • Firm Overview
    • Experience
    • Fraternal Law Conference
    • Conference Sponsorship
  • Our Attorneys
    • Overview
    • Timothy M. Burke
    • Sean P. Callan
    • John E. Christopher
    • Amy M. Hebbeler
    • Patrick K. Hogan
    • Micah E. Kamrass
    • Ilana L. Linder
    • Jacklyn D. Olinger
    • Jacob W. Purcell
    • Jeffrey C. Sun
  • Practice Areas
    • Overview
    • Real Estate and Housing
    • Tax
    • Employment Issues
    • Corporate Governance
    • Grant-Making
    • Litigation
    • Risk Management & Hazing
    • Fundraising & Stewardship
    • State Registration for Greek Foundations
  • Client Resources
  • Anti-Hazing
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
    • Join Our Newsletter
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Instagram
513-721-5525
Fraternal Law

Fraternal Law Newsletter

Publications

Newsletter


Articles

  • ALLEGED HAZING INJURY DRAWS LAWSUIT
  • WRONGFUL EXPULSION
  • WE MAY HAVE DONE IT WRONG THE FIRST TIME, BUT YOU ARE STILL GUILTY
  • DELTA KAPPA EPSILON SUES COLGATE

Search

Newsletter > March 2005 > "WRONGFUL EXPULSION"

WRONGFUL EXPULSION

Robert Manley, Manley Burke


The spring of the year is frequently when fraternity chapters around the country finally get fed up with one or another member.  A decision is made that they need to get rid of the troublesome member.  Sometimes the expulsion is done in haste with a reckless disregard for the niceties of fair play.

All fraternities should have a standardized procedure for disciplining its members.  The most severe discipline, of course, is expulsion.

It would be nice if a member could be disciplined based upon anonymous written accusations rather than an actual presentation of facts through documents and testimony where the accused has the right to confront the accuser.  It would be nice if the expulsion could take place without a hearing and without notice or an opportunity for the accused to present a defense.

Little things like a fair procedural process are inconvenient for those who want to get rid of the troublesome member.  Unfortunately, the one thing the courts may do is insist on fair procedures when a membership expulsion is undertaken.  It is not likely that any court will second-guess a rule or regulation of a fraternity as long as it is reasonably related to its purposes.  It is not likely that a court will overturn a decision to expel if the decision is made in a procedurally correct manner.

What is a procedurally correct manner?  Most critically, the procedure followed must conform to the published disciplinary procedures of the organization.  Additional best practices to insure courts will not interfere with internal disciplinary decisions include:

  • Notice to the accused that is sufficiently clear to tell the accused what facts give rise to the accused violation of the fraternity rule.
  • The rule that was violated must have been promulgated, clear and unambiguous.
  • The hearing is scheduled with adequate time for preparation.
  • The accuser testifies in the presence of the accused. Written statements, particularly anonymous ones, should not be acceptable.
  • The accused should have the right to cross examine the accuser.
  • The accused should have the right to present evidence that contradicts the assertions of the accuser, or witnesses that support the accuser’s assertions.
  • The decision-maker should be fair and impartial.
  • The decision-maker should relate the facts as presented by both sides to the clear and unambiguous rule that is alleged to have been violated.
  • The decision-maker should make the decision based solely on the facts brought before the hearing, not on outside rumors, suppositions or gossip.
  • While it may not be necessary, it is always wise to have at least one level of administrative appeal, perhaps from the chapter’s disciplinary board to a national office.

It is amazing how many fraternities are inclined to look upon procedures for expulsion as though the procedures were unimportant.  The comment I sometimes hear, “We know the accused is guilty.”

The one thing a court may very well do is overturn a decision if these procedural steps are not followed.

Tragically, it is not only fraternity chapters that can make mistakes in implementing discipline, some universities even conduct disciplinary procedures in such a way as to violate the right of the accused to a fair hearing.

 

JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER

Attorney Advertising. The laws governing legal advertising in the state of Ohio require the following statement in any publication of this kind: "THIS IS AN ADVERTISEMENT." This website is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Copyright © 2023 Fraternal Law Partners. All rights reserved.

Privacy Policy Disclaimer
Fraternal Law

Newsletters

Sign Up For Updates

Get the latest news from Fraternal Law Partners in your inbox.

    By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: Fraternal Law Parnterns. You can revoke your consent to recieve emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® Link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact.