Liu v. Northwestern University, 78 F. Supp. 3d 839

Background

Annie Liu, a Northwestern Law student with diagnosed endometriosis and related psychiatric conditions, received SSD accommodations but experienced severe symptoms during Spring 2013 exam period.
Dean Clifford Zimmerman set an exam schedule, refused additional postponements despite medical notes from Northwestern physicians, imposed failing grades and an enrollment hold when deadlines were missed, and required production of medical and computer records as conditions of return from leave.
Zimmerman emailed 23 faculty/staff on May 2, 2013 describing Liu as "uncooperative, evasive, and not forthcoming" and instructing recipients to refer Liu back to him or call emergency services if she claimed a medical emergency.
Liu filed an internal OEOA grievance (investigation completed after ~9+ months) and alleged Northwestern breached handbook-based contractual due-process rights, defamed her, publicly disclosed private facts, and tortiously interfered with her psychiatrist relationship.
Court treated student handbook as potential source of an implied contract, allowed breach-of-contract claim to proceed only to the extent that Liu alleges denial of handbook due-process protections for suspected academic-integrity charges; dismissed breach claim insofar as it relied on the handbook’s vague promise to investigate "expeditiously."
Court dismissed defamation (May 2 email statements deemed nonactionable opinion), dismissed public-disclosure claim (no plausible private medical facts disclosed), and dismissed tortious-interference claim (physician-patient relationships terminable at will under Illinois law).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Northwestern breached handbook-implied contract by denying due-process procedures for alleged academic-integrity suspicions	Liu: handbook rights apply to students "suspected" or "de facto" charged; Zimmerman’s actions (holds, failing grades, conditions) amounted to charges without procedural protections	Northwestern: Liu was never formally charged, so handbook due-process provisions do not apply	Court: Plausible that handbook language could cover "suspected" charges; breach-of-contract claim allowed to proceed on denial of handbook procedures because alleged actions amount to de facto charges
Whether Northwestern breached contract by failing to investigate grievance promptly	Liu: OEOA policy promises investigations "usually" completed in 30–60 days; nine-month investigation breached that promise	Northwestern: policy is nonbinding, discretionary and not a definite contractual promise	Court: Dismissed claim based on timing; policy is aspirational/indefinite and not enforceable as a contractual standard
Whether Zimmerman’s May 2 email is defamatory	Liu: Email statements impute dishonesty and fabrication of medical symptoms to obtain accommodations	Northwestern: Statements are non-actionable opinion or susceptible to innocent construction	Court: Dismissed defamation claim; statements were opinion lacking factual context and not objectively verifiable
Whether May 2 email publicly disclosed private medical facts	Liu: Email disclosed that she had a medical condition and sought accommodations (HIPAA/Illinois Mental Health Act-protected)	Northwestern: Email did not identify any private medical diagnosis or disclose protected health information	Court: Dismissed public-disclosure claim; email did not plausibly disclose private medical facts
Whether Northwestern tortiously interfered with plaintiff’s psychiatrist relationship	Liu: Northwestern’s contact with providers caused termination and breached the contractual relationship	Northwestern: Physician-patient relationship is terminable at will; no enforceable contract	Court: Dismissed tortious-interference claim with prejudice; Illinois law treats physician-patient relationships as at-will, precluding tortious-interference recovery

Key Cases Cited

Sung Park v. Indiana Univ. Sch. of Dentistry, 692 F.3d 828 (7th Cir. 2012) (student handbook may create implied contractual rights)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (Sup. Ct. 2009) (plausibility standard for pleadings)
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (Sup. Ct. 2007) (pleading must be plausible, not merely possible)
Regents of the Univ. of Michigan v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (Sup. Ct. 1985) (courts defer to academic judgments unless actions are a substantial departure from accepted academic norms)
Seitz-Partridge v. Loyola Univ. of Chicago, 409 Ill. App. 3d 76 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011) (university-student contract claims require showing of arbitrary, capricious, or bad-faith action)
Raethz v. Aurora Univ., 346 Ill. App. 3d 728 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004) (student may recover for breach only if adverse academic decision was arbitrary or capricious)
Solaia Tech., LLC v. Specialty Publ’g Co., 221 Ill. 2d 558 (Ill. 2006) (defamation standards and defamatory-per-se categories)
Schivarelli v. CBS, Inc., 338 Ill. App. 3d 755 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003) (statements lacking factual context treated as nonactionable opinion)
Dubinsky v. United Airlines Master Exec. Council, 303 Ill. App. 3d 317 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999) (general abusive labels without factual context are opinion)
Hopewell v. Vitullo, 299 Ill. App. 3d 513 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998) (broad, subjective assertions not objectively verifiable)
Olaf v. Christie Clinic Ass’n, 200 Ill. App. 3d 191 (Ill. App. Ct. 1990) (physician-patient relationship is terminable at will)
Cody v. Harris, 409 F.3d 853 (7th Cir. 2005) (inducement of cancellation of at-will contracts is interference with prospective advantage, not tortious interference with contract)