Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
P was a student of D. P took a class by Dr. Aleksandr Makarov. Prior to the first examination, a student anonymously contacted D's academic dean and alleged that P was selling copies of the forthcoming examination. D conducted an investigation, concluding that P committed academic misconduct as detailed in the college's handbook by 'buying, selling, otherwise obtaining, possessing or using any copy of any material intended to be used as an instrument of academic evaluation in advance of its initial administration.' D dismissed P from the college, notifying him by letter of his right to appeal the decision in accord with the 'due process' procedures set forth in the student handbook. After exhausting the appeal procedures, P sued D for breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation against D, breach of contract against Dr. Makarov, and fraudulent nondisclosure against D. The jury returned a verdict for P on his fraudulent misrepresentation awarding $20,000 in damages. The jury returned a verdict against Dr. Makarov on the breach of contract claim, awarding $10,000 in damages. The jury returned a verdict in favor of D on the remaining breach of contract and fraudulent nondisclosure claims. On D's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the circuit court set aside the verdict against D on the fraudulent misrepresentation claim. The circuit court denied Pi's motion for additur or new trial on the issue of damages. P appealed. Dr. Makarov cross-appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co