1. General Provisions
Lives, freedoms, and fortunes are entrusted to lawyers. Where dishonor exists in the legal profession, our system of justice suffers. Thus, for the individual embarking upon the professional path of law, integrity is fundamental.
Dishonesty within the University of North Dakota School of Law injures not only the welfare of classmates and the institution, but also the foundations of liberty and fairness for our society. Untrustworthiness in a law student cannot be tolerated. The life-long obligation to honorable dealing must commence at the moment of law school matriculation.
The purpose of this Honor Code is to define and enforce the rules by which the students of the School of Law are governed with respect to academic matters. This Code recognizes the need for clear consequences for behavior that violates its terms, together with fair procedures for judging alleged cases of misconduct. The success or failure of an honor code is dependent on the willingness of those governed by it to enforce it. If the Code is to be effective, each student must make a personal commitment to comply individually with its provisions and must accept the responsibility of assuring compliance by other students.
“Accusation” shall have the meaning ascribed to it in Section 4.1 of this Code.
“Accused Student” shall mean the student accused of the apparent violation of this Code who is the subject of an investigation or hearing contemplated by this Code.
“Chair” shall have the meaning ascribed to such term in Section 5.1 of this Code.
“Code” shall mean this Honor Code of the University of North Dakota School of Law adopted by the Faculty on April 30, 2010, as amended from time to time.
“Dean” shall mean the then-presiding Dean, whether acting, interim, or permanent, of the University of North Dakota School of Law.
“Enrolled” shall mean registered in at least one class at the University of North Dakota School of Law.
“Faculty” shall mean the tenured and tenure-eligible members of the faculty of the University of North Dakota School of Law.
“Honor Board” shall mean the body vested with the authority and responsibility to conduct formal hearings and to perform other related duties, as set forth in this Code, in connection with apparent violations of this Code.
“Instructor” shall mean any member of the Faculty and any person with teaching responsibility for a School of Law course.
“Investigators” shall have the meaning ascribed to such term in Section 4.1 of this Code.
“Knowingly” shall mean that an Accused Student acts with knowledge, consciously, intentionally, or willfully.
“Recklessly” shall mean that an Accused Student disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material elements of a Code violation exist or will result from his or her conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the Accused Student’s conduct, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct outlined in the Code.
“School Day” shall mean any day on which regular classes (excluding summer session classes) are held at the School of Law.
“School of Law” shall mean the University of North Dakota School of Law.
“University” shall mean the University of North Dakota.
1.3 Authority of School, Dean, Instructor, and Honor Board; Effect
This Code is binding on all students Enrolled at the School of Law. Actions committed by students prior to enrollment shall be beyond the scope of this policy and may be governed by separate policies of the School of Law. The University of North Dakota Academic Dishonesty and Misconduct Policy, and the Academic or Scholastic Dishonesty Sanctions Policy, both adopted February 15, 1991 and updated September 5, 2002, are superseded by this Code. Authority for determining the grade for a student in a course in which a Code violation has been alleged shall always lie with that course’s instructor; without limitation, an instructor may impose a grade sanction for student misconduct related to the instructor’s course, including for misconduct described in this Code, and other prohibited conduct as set forth in the course syllabus or other course materials, such as exam instructions. An instructor may impose grade sanctions regardless of whether a student’s conduct is subject to any proceeding under this Code. The student shall always have the right to appeal any grade assignments pursuant to the applicable School of Law and University policies.
The Dean is responsible for enforcing this Code. The authority to enforce this Code is delegated in part to an Honor Board of Faculty, students, and administrators empanelled by the procedures prescribed in this Code.
It is acknowledged that in undertaking the responsibilities imposed by this Code, various parties (including without limitation, the University, the School of Law, and the Honor Board), may be bound in the first instance to follow the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (known as “FERPA”), state open-records laws, and other laws, as applicable. In addition, parties may be required to respond to lawful court orders or subpoenas. In heeding all such legal obligations, such parties are to endeavor to give effect to the letter and spirit of the Honor Code, whenever possible.
At any time prior to or during the formal hearing process, the Dean may settle the matter on terms agreed upon by the Dean and the Accused Student. In deciding whether to settle the matter, the Dean may weigh an Accused Student’s acceptance of responsibility for the conduct, including whether the Accused Student self-reported the Accusation.
1.5 Effect of Time Limitations
The failure of the Dean or any other person to comply with time limitations contained in this Code shall not constitute a defense to charges of a violation of this Code or be grounds for dismissing charges of a violation of this Code, unless the failure to comply with any such time limitation was without any reasonable excuse and such failure might reasonably be expected to result in an action or decision unfairly prejudicial to the rights of the Accused Student.