Background

• Davis sued Virginia Commonwealth University administrators alleging due process violations in denying her tenure and promotion to associate professor.
• The district court dismissed Davis's complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim.
• The Fourth Circuit reviews de novo a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal, accepting allegations as true and drawing reasonable inferences in the plaintiff's favor.
• A procedural due process claim requires a cognizable life, liberty, or property interest, deprivation of that interest, and constitutionally inadequate procedures.
• Property interests arise from existing rules or understandings created by state law and require a legitimate claim of entitlement, not mere unilateral expectation.
• Davis argued she was entitled to a fair review under VCU’s Promotion and Tenure Review Guidelines, but the court held tenure procedures alone do not create a protected property interest.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Sansotta v. Town of Nags Head, 724 F.3d 533 (4th Cir. 2013) (threshold property-interest requirement for due process)
• Olim v. Wakinekona, 461 U.S. 238 (1983) (due process protects substantive interests; process serves those interests)
• Bd. of Regents of State Colls. v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (1972) (property interests defined by existing rules; entitlement necessary)
• Siu v. Johnson, 748 F.2d 238 (4th Cir. 1984) (tenure procedures alone do not create a protected interest)
• Kensington Volunteer Fire Dep’t v. Montgomery Cnty., 684 F.3d 462 (4th Cir. 2012) (standard for Rule 12(b)(6) plausibility)