Quote:
Originally Posted by SWTXBelle
Having recognized Delta Zeta, (a voluntary action on the part of DePauw) the school is bound by its own rules to treat it exactly as it said it would - through the University's self-written policies. That's why the policies are there in the first place - to ensure that all students and organization are treated equitably. . . . The policy - instituted AFTER the DZ debacle - that GLOs can't throw anyone out of the house mid-year is a good one. But it was not in place at the time Delta Zeta did so, and so Depauw can hardly say DZ did not meet their obligations. They can be upset, they can change the policy, but to throw out the chapter without going through the procedure THEY outline for transgressions by student organizations is to basically declare that the University is a dictatorship, not an institution built on a rule of law.
|
As IvySpice said
just a few posts ago, Delta Zeta really can't have a cause of action based on DePauw's failing to follow its internal policies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSteven
If this case moves forward, do you - or any other legal folk - anticipate any legal repercussions that might affect other fraternal organizations? More to the point, could this case set some sort of negative precedent?
|
That's very hard to say without actually reading the complaint that has been filed and DePauw's motion to dismiss or answer, that will be filed. At this point, we are all only speculating as to what the allegations and actual claims are, and what DePauw's defenses (and counter-claims, if any) will be, since they are what lay out the issues that will be decided in this case.
Threaded Mode
