170 So. 3d 209
La. Ct. App.2015Background
- Sheila Guidry enrolled in Our Lady of the Lake College (OLOL) nurse anesthesia program and signed an acknowledgment of the Student Handbook and received the Clinical Practicum I syllabus.
- Clinical Practicum I was graded pass/fail; the syllabus stated an 80% achievement level was expected to pass; Guidry scored 70% on the midterm.
- Instructor Yvonne Bahlinger allowed Guidry (and others) to continue despite the low midterm, averaged midterm and final scores, and ultimately assigned Guidry a failing grade when the averaged result did not meet 80%.
- Guidry appealed her grade and program dismissal through OLOL procedures; the Dean of Nursing and the Admissions, Progression, and Graduation (APG) committee denied her appeals.
- Guidry filed administrative complaints (OCR and accreditation) which were denied, then sued for breach of contract and bad faith alleging OLOL and Bahlinger failed to follow handbook/syllabus grading promises.
- Trial court granted summary judgment for defendants; appellate court affirmed, finding no evidence the academic decision was arbitrary or capricious.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the handbook/syllabus formed a binding contract | Guidry: handbook and syllabus created contractual promises on grading/procedure | OLOL/Bahlinger: handbook acknowledgment does not create enforceable contract; academic decisions are nonjusticiable | Court: contract principles apply but academic judgments are judicially reviewable only for arbitrariness; no contract breach shown |
| Whether instructor deviated from syllabus or improperly calculated grade | Guidry: Bahlinger misapplied grading rules, failing to use cumulative standard and not providing rubric | Bahlinger: she permitted extra opportunity by averaging midterm/final; grading changes applied consistently | Court: Bahlinger’s grading not shown arbitrary/capricious; no basis to override professional judgment |
| Whether dismissal and appeal procedures were followed | Guidry: appeals were defective or biased (e.g., faculty involvement) | OLOL: appeals were conducted per handbook; faculty participation limited to review/answering questions | Court: record shows procedures were followed and no evidence of improper participation |
| Whether evidence showed arbitrary or capricious academic action warranting judicial intervention | Guidry: scoring changes, alleged targeting, lack of rubric show arbitrariness | Defs: scoring adjustments applied class-wide; no evidence of ill will or improper motive | Court: no factual showing of arbitrariness; substantial deference to academic judgment warranted; summary judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Ross v. Creighton Univ., 957 F.2d 410 (7th Cir. 1992) (relationship between student and private college is contractual; courts review for breach of identifiable promises)
- Babcock v. New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, 554 So.2d 90 (La. 1989) (educational promises in institutional materials may form part of student-institution contract)
- Regents of Univ. of Mich. v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (1985) (courts must defer to academic judgments and will not override absent arbitrariness)
- Bd. of Curators v. Horowitz, 435 U.S. 78 (1978) (academic dismissals require expert evaluation and are accorded substantial deference)