John McAdams v. Marquette University
914 N.W.2d 708
Wis.2018Background
- John McAdams, a tenured Marquette University political science professor (tenure since 1989), posted a critical blog entry on Nov. 9, 2014 about a graduate-student instructor's classroom response to a student on "gay rights."
- The instructor filed a complaint; the post drew national attention and third‑party hostile communications to the instructor. Marquette suspended McAdams (with pay, then without pay) and initiated its disciplinary procedure.
- The Faculty Hearing Committee (FHC), a seven‑member faculty advisory panel, held a four‑day hearing, found discretionary cause for discipline (but recommended suspension, not dismissal), and issued a detailed report recommending one to two semesters' suspension without pay.
- President Lovell accepted the FHC recommendation, imposed suspension without pay, and conditioned reinstatement on McAdams acknowledging the FHC judgment and expressing regret; McAdams refused and sued for breach of contract.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to Marquette, deferring to the university process; the Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed, holding (1) Marquette's internal Discipline Procedure does not preclude full judicial review, and (2) McAdams' blog post was protected academic freedom under his contract, so his suspension breached the contract and he must be reinstated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Marquette's internal Discipline Procedure bars or limits court review of a contract dispute | McAdams: Contract does not waive judicial review; Faculty Statute §307.09 contemplates judicial adjudication | Marquette: Court must defer to internal process (analogous to arbitration or administrative deference) so long as no abuse, bad faith, or fraud | Court: No waiver; statutes expressly preserve right to litigate; no deference—internal process is advisory and president's decision is unprocedured |
| Whether the FHC/process merits arbitration‑style deference | McAdams: No contractual arbitration; FHC biased and advisory; president exercised unfettered discretion | Marquette: FHC hearing was comprehensive and should receive deference like an arbitration award | Court: No—FHC was compromised by evident partiality, provided only nonbinding advice, and the president was not bound by any procedural constraints |
| Whether McAdams' blog post is protected by the contractually incorporated academic freedom doctrine | McAdams: Blog is an extramural comment protected by Faculty Handbook/AAUP standards; does not clearly demonstrate unfitness | Marquette: Post (and subsequent publicity/harms) show reckless conduct that undermines duties to students and community, supporting discretionary cause | Court: Held protected—applying AAUP two‑step test, the post alone does not clearly demonstrate unfitness; post cannot be used as basis for discretionary cause |
| Remedy for breach (suspension vs. dismissal; reinstatement conditions) | McAdams: Suspension was breach; conditioning reinstatement on recantation of protected speech is invalid; seeks reinstatement and damages/back pay | Marquette: Discipline and reinstatement conditions were reasonable and within discretion | Court: Suspensions (paid and unpaid) breached contract; McAdams entitled to immediate reinstatement with unimpaired rank, tenure, compensation and benefits; damages (including back pay) to be determined on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis. 2d 304 (1987) (summary judgment de novo review and methodology for legal claims)
- Columbia Propane, L.P. v. Wisconsin Gas Co., 261 Wis. 2d 70 (2003) (standards for affirming summary judgment)
- McConnell v. Howard University, 818 F.2d 58 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (rejecting near‑total judicial deference to a university's self‑interested decision to fire tenured faculty)
- Joint Sch. Dist. No. 10, Jefferson v. Jefferson Educ. Ass'n, 78 Wis. 2d 94 (1977) (arbitration is contractual and review is limited to agreed scope)
- Borst v. Allstate Ins. Co., 291 Wis. 2d 361 (2006) (presumption of arbitrator impartiality and reluctance to substitute judicial judgment for contracted dispute resolution)
- City of Madison v. Madison Prof'l Police Officers Ass'n, 144 Wis. 2d 576 (1988) (describing appellate deference principles in employment/administrative contexts)