Appendices B - 1
The University of Dayton School of Law Honor Code
March 25, 2002

Introduction

Honor is essential to achieving the purpose of our system of justice, the protection of freedom and individual human rights. Without honor, the concept of justice would be artificial, and our freedom and rights illusory. However, honor is not a tangible object to be worn as visible evidence of one’s integrity. Nor can the presence of honor be established by words alone. Honor makes its presence known through the actions of honorable people. Those who practice law act as sentinels to protect our system of justice, and can only succeed if they are, first and foremost, honorable.

Success in law school does not flow from high class rank or GPA but from doing what is right. The attribute of honor is what distinguishes great attorneys from those who cannot rise above themselves and what elevates legal practice from being an interesting job into a noble profession.

Every privilege carries with it an attendant responsibility, and the privilege of practicing law on behalf of the public is no different. To enjoy the privilege of entering into a noble and honorable profession, we are obligated to take on the responsibility of maintaining its nobility and honor. The first step toward living up to that responsibility is to ensure that we practice personal honor and integrity by following the rules of the profession.

As stated in the Preface to the Code of Professional Responsibility, “the Ethical Considerations are aspirational in character and represent the objectives toward which every member of the profession should strive.” Code of Professional Responsibility Preface (1970). The Honor Code of the University of Dayton School of Law is designed to achieve these objectives by serving as the outward sign of our inward value of justice and honor.

University of Dayton School of Law Honor Code
Table of Contents
Article I

Code of Conduct

Article II

Honor Council Proceedings

Article III

The Honor Council

Article IV

Code Violations: Preliminary Investigative Procedure

Article V

Code Violations: Hearing Procedure

Article VI

Miscellaneous

Article VII

Process for Amending the Honor Code

Article I
Code of Conduct

1.01 Purposes and Objectives

Practice personal honor and integrity so as to instill and perpetuate the highest standards of ethics and professional conduct;
Ensure each student’s privilege to study in an environment free from unfair and dishonest competition;
Guard the academic and professional integrity and the reputation of the University of Dayton School of Law (“UDSL”);
Assure this community and members of the public elsewhere of the ethical principles practiced and qualifications demonstrated by the graduates of UDSL by serving as the outward sign of our inward values of justice and honor
Ensure preservation and protection of due process principles of fairness on behalf of the accused at all times.

1.02 Authority and Guidance
The Honor Council (“Honor Council”), comprised of students elected to represent the school, bears the primary responsibility of enforcing the Honor Code.
The Honor Council has jurisdiction over claims of dishonorable conduct affecting the academic environment of UDSL during a student’s tenure as stated in 1.03. All claims of dishonorable conduct falling outside of this
Each student should be guided by the purposes and objectives of this Code, and by common sense. Where necessary, students should seek clarification from the Honor Council President or the Faculty Advisor to the Honor Council as to what constitutes dishonorable conduct.
This Code is binding on all students of UDSL.

1.03 Dishonorable Conduct

The following conduct violates UDSL’s Honor Code, subjecting the violator to sanctions imposed by the Dean pursuant to 5.08:

Cheating (acts of academic dishonesty including, but not limited to: acquiring, obtaining, or giving any assistance or information on examinations or assignments, except as authorized by the professor);
Plagiarizing (appropriating another’s words or ideas and representing them as one’s own as defined in Appendix A- Statement on Plagiarism);
Utilizing unauthorized materials or otherwise breaching, in any manner, the instructions of a professor or proctor regarding examinations or assignments;
Defacing, damaging, concealing, intentionally misshelving, using or removing any library materials without authorization;
Intentionally misrepresenting a student’s academic or professional qualifications, conduct, class standing, grades, honors, activities or financial need on any written document or oral statement, including but not limited to financial aid applications, resumes, and interviews;
Falsifying class attendance records (your own or a classmate’s);
Intentionally harming or threatening to harm another student or employee of the University of Dayton, or intentionally harassing such person with sufficient severity, persistence, or pervasiveness that the conduct creates a hostile environment for the victim. Such conduct violates the Honor Code whether committed on or off campus, and by such means including but not limited to, telephone, e-mail, and physical or verbal conduct.
Alleging in bad faith that a student has violated this Code;
Failing or refusing to cooperate in Honor Council proceedings, as an accused or as a witness, as required by this Code;
Engaging in the following conduct, which reflects negatively on one’s honor and integrity, and bears upon one's fitness to practice law:
offenses committed on campus or related to a campus activity or organization that may result in criminal convictions for:
a felony of violence such as murder, robbery or rape;
felonies or misdemeanors involving acts of dishonesty such as theft, fraud or bribery;
repeated misdemeanors involving the risk of death or serious bodily injury to others; or
off-campus acts of academic dishonesty such as collaborating on a take-home examination or legal profession paper in violation of a professor’s prohibition against such acts.
For purposes of this Code, all conduct occurring on the campus of the University of Dayton, whether during normal school or not, shall be considered an on-campus event or activity.
Conspiring, soliciting, attempting, or agreeing to commit, assist in or facilitate the commission of any violation of this Code;
Failing to bring information concerning a violation of this Code to the attention of the Honor Council, pursuant to 1.04;
Violating the ex parte communications provisions of 2.02 of this Code;
Seriously disrupting and/or interfering with the operation of the University of Dayton

1.04 Duty to Report Honor Code Violations
Any member of the UDSL community with firsthand knowledge of a violation of 1.03a-n has an affirmative duty to report such violation in writing to the President of the Honor Council, pursuant to 4.01.
The written accusation must allege specific acts that violate the Honor Code.
To protect the rights of the accused, such reports may not be made anonymously.
The identity of the individual making the accusation will remain confidential with the appointed investigators, and will only be revealed to the Honor Council Hearing Panel, as established by 5.04, if the investigators have made a determination of probable cause, pursuant to 4.02(c), that the accusation warrants further proceedings.

Article II
Honor Council Proceedings

2.01 Confidentiality of Proceedings

All Honor Council proceedings are confidential. No person may, without the explicit authorization from the Honor Council, disclose information concerning an Honor Council proceeding which identifies, or which could reasonably be expected to identify, the accused, the accuser, or any other witness, except to the extent allowed by this Code. This duty of confidentiality extends to any and all witnesses, accusers, and individuals questioned regarding a possible violation of this Code.
The Dean of the School of Law has limited discretion to release otherwise confidential information. However, prior to doing so, he or she must notify the Honor Council of his or her intent to do so.
The duty to maintain confidentiality is ongoing and does not end with the termination of the proceedings.
The duty to maintain confidentiality shall neither excuse nor prevent the disclosure to bar examiners of a student's guilty verdict in Honor Council proceedings.
Breach of confidentiality by any member of the Honor Council or any individual called before the Council shall be a violation of this Code.
Only the accused may waive confidentiality and must do so in writing.
2.02 Ex Parte Communications
An accused may not engage in ex parte communications with investigators, school advocates, student advocates, witnesses, presiding officers, Honor Council members, Faculty advisor to the Honor Council, or the Dean regarding the contents of his or her case prior to or during Honor Council proceedings, except as provided by this Code. Such persons also have an affirmative duty not to engage in such ex parte communications with the accused, and shall report all such contacts to the President of the Honor Council or the Dean, as appropriate.
Communications regarding procedural aspects of the Honor Council proceedings are acceptable, but must be directed to either the Faculty Advisor or the President of the Honor Council.

Article III
The Honor Council
3.01 Membership

The Honor Council shall consist of ten (10) second-year students and ten (10) third-year students who shall be known as the Honor Council. These students shall be elected by respective members of their class each year and shall serve a maximum of two (2) academic years.

3.02 Election of Honor Council Members

Election of Honor Council members shall be held annually on or before April 15th. The term of office shall begin the fall semester immediately following the election and shall run for one full academic year.
All students in good standing at UDSL shall be eligible to become candidates.
Each candidate:
must secure and submit, by a posted deadline, the signatures of twenty (20) students on a nominating form provided by the Council;
may submit for publication a typed statement of up to fifty (50) words; and
is prohibited from campaigning or having others do so on their behalf.
All students with valid school identification cards shall be eligible to nominate and vote for up to ten (10) candidates from their respective class. Each eligible law student has a total of ten (10) votes, which may be allocated at his or her discretion between any or all of the candidates from his or her respective class.
In the case of a tie for the tenth spot of each class, the successful candidate shall be selected by a runoff vote by members of his or her respective class. This runoff shall take place within two (2) school days of the preliminary election day.
In the event of a vacancy on the Honor Council that cannot be filled from the previous unsuccessful candidates pursuant to 3.08, then a special election will be held with the candidates receiving the most votes filling vacant positions.
3.03 Faculty Advisor
One non-voting Faculty Advisor shall be appointed to the Honor Council for a one-year term by the Dean from among the full-time faculty of the School of Law.
The Dean may renew the appointment of the Faculty Advisor for an unlimited number of successive terms.
When requested by the Honor Council, the Faculty Advisor shall give advice to the Honor Council regarding any matters before the Honor Council.
The Faculty Advisor shall be a silent observer of all Honor Council hearings.
3.04 The Honor Council President
The membership of the outgoing Honor Council, including the President, shall elect a President for the following year from among those Honor Council members-elect who will be beginning their third year of law school The new President shall be elected by a majority of the full body of the Honor Council for a one-year term and shall assume office immediately following the last day of classes of the Spring semester.
In order to maintain complete impartiality in the administration of Honor Council proceedings, the President shall not vote on the question of whether to investigate an alleged violation, the existence of probable cause, or the question of whether the accused is guilty or innocent of the alleged Honor Code violation.
The President of the Honor Council shall preside over the actual Honor Code Hearing, make rulings on evidentiary objections, and ensure that the hearing is conducted in a manner that is orderly, expeditious, fair, and consistent with these rules and the purpose of the hearing.
In the event that the President of the Honor Council is unable to preside or is disqualified pursuant to 3.06(a), the Honor Council shall elect by popular vote one of its members to preside over the Honor Hearing in the place of the President.
The Honor Council President is a voting member of the Honor Council and has the authority to vote in Honor Council general business meetings except as outlined above.
3.05 Duties and Powers of the Honor Council

The Honor Council shall have the following duties and powers to:
promote awareness of the Honor Code among students;
investigate all allegations properly submitted in compliance with 4.01, which facially indicate that a violation of the Code may have occurred;
hear evidence and arguments and determine the merits of any allegation in accordance with the procedures provided for herein;
decide all questions of law and fact relating to the guilt or innocence of the accused, and sanctions to be imposed other than evidentiary issues to be decided by the presiding officer;
maintain the confidentiality of Honor Council proceedings, unless confidentiality has been waived in writing by the accused;
carry out any other responsibilities specified in this Code.
3.06 Recusal and Exclusion of Honor Council Members from Voting
Any member who is likely to become a party or a witness, or is related by blood or marriage to a party or witness, may not participate in any way in that case and has an affirmative duty to recuse himself or herself. Such recusal shall take place at the moment of discovery.
A recused member may not participate in any way in the deliberations of the Honor Council regarding the subject matter for which he or she was recused.
Following a determination of probable cause, an accused may move to exclude a member of the Honor Council from further participation at any time by submitting to the Honor Council President a written motion including stated grounds for exclusion. If a majority of the Council members present approve the motion, the member may not participate further in the proceeding. No member shall vote on the motion for his or her own recusal.
Honor Council members may recuse themselves from voting only for good cause as stated to the Honor Council. The Honor Council by majority vote will determine if recusal is appropriate.
3.07 Permanent Removal of Members from Honor Council
Removal by student vote.
A student vote for removal shall be held only after the Council receives a request for removal signed by fifty (50) students. The request shall state grounds for removal.
The removal election shall be held at least ten (10) school days after the petition is received. The ballot shall contain the name of the person whose removal is sought and "Retain [ ] yes [ ] no". The President shall administer this election and shall not vote.
All students are eligible to vote on the question of removal.
The removal vote shall not be valid unless at least 25% of the student body participates.
A member shall be removed upon a two-thirds (?) vote of all students voting on the question.
Removal by the Honor Council. A member may be removed by the Honor Council upon a two-thirds (?) vote of the full body of the Council, not including those recused or excluded from participation.. The vote shall not be taken until at least ten (10) school days after a copy of a written request is given to the member whose removal is sought. The member whose removal has been proposed may not vote on the question.
Any member of the Honor Council accused of a violation of the Code is automatically suspended from the Council following a determination of probable cause and the suspension will last until the matter is resolved. An alternate shall be selected pursuant to the procedure in 3.08 if necessary to complete the hearing panel.
3.08 Filling of Vacancies and Selection of Alternates

If a permanent vacancy occurs on the Council for any reason, the vacancy shall be filled by the unsuccessful candidate who received the highest number of votes in the election in which the former member was elected to the Council. If the individual is unwilling to serve, then the unsuccessful candidate with the next highest number of votes shall be selected. To become a member of the Council, such candidate must receive the confirming vote of one-half (½) of the full body of the Council. If the candidate fails to receive one-half (½) of the votes, or if there are no unsuccessful candidates willing to serve, then the new member must be elected pursuant to 3.02(f).

3.09 Voting and Quorum Requirements

General Business Meetings. The President shall call meetings of the Honor Council as he or she deems necessary. No formal business of the Council shall be conducted unless a quorum is present. A quorum at General Business Meetings shall consist of 51% or more of the members of the full body of the Honor Council who are eligible to vote. Unless otherwise provided by this Code, resolutions or decisions of the Honor Council shall become effective upon the affirmative vote of a majority of those present.
Formal Hearings. Ten (10) of the twenty (20) Honor Council members shall constitute a quorum for all Honor Council violation matters. The quorum of ten (10) shall not include the President, the Investigator, or the Prosecutor.
Abstentions. Except as provided in 3.06, no member of the Honor Council may abstain from voting on any matter on which he/she is eligible to vote.

Article IV
Code Violations: Preliminary Investigative Procedure
4.01 Accusation Procedures
Any person with firsthand knowledge concerning a violation of this Honor Code shall report the matter to the President of the Honor Council within twenty (20) school days of receiving such knowledge and forming a reasonable belief that a violation has occurred.
Prior to reporting an Honor Code violation pursuant to 1.04, any student with firsthand knowledge of the violation who believes another student witnessed the same must first ask the student whether he or she witnessed the violation. A suspicion does not constitute firsthand knowledge.
Any student who denies witnessing the Honor Code violation and fails to report the same is not in violation of this Code. Any student that confirms witnessing the Honor Code violation and fails to report the same is in violation of this Code pursuant to 1.04(l).
The Honor Council Investigating Team, as defined in 4.02(b) is authorized to investigate a potential violation only after the President has received a formal accusation. Accusations must be in writing and must include the name (if known) of the accused, a specific description of the alleged misconduct, and the legible name and signature of the accuser. The President will then open a file using the style "In Re: Accused", which shall be retained in confidence by the President and the Investigators until such time as probable cause is or is not found in accordance with 4.02(d).
Once submitted, an accusation may not be withdrawn without good cause. A withdrawal shall be submitted in writing to the President and good cause shall be determined by a simple majority vote of the Honor Council.
4.02 Investigation
Upon receipt of the accusation, the President shall convene a meeting within ten (10) school days. The facts alleged in the accusation shall be made known to the Council, but the names of the accused, the accuser, and any other parties or principals shall not be disclosed to the Council members. After consideration of the facts alleged in the accusation, the Council shall determine by majority vote whether the matter should be dismissed or an investigation should be commenced. The sole criterion for this determination shall be whether the allegation(s), if true, would constitute a violation of any provision of the Honor Code.
If the Council determines that an investigation is warranted, three (3) investigators shall be selected within 3 school days. These three (3) individuals make up the Investigating Team. One (1) investigator shall be selected by the accused. The President shall select one (1) from the Honor Council. One (1) investigator shall be selected at random from the Investigator Pool. The Investigator Pool shall be made up of first-year law students who volunteer to be members. The President of the Honor Council shall not serve as a member of an Investigating Team. During the course of the investigation, the President, the Investigating Team and any witnesses that have been interviewed shall be the only persons who know the identity of the accused and the accuser.
Duties of the Investigators
The investigators shall, within ten (10) school days after the appointment of all investigators:
contact and interview in person the accuser;
contact and interview in person the accused;
contact, or make a reasonable attempt to contact, all necessary witnesses or other persons believed to have information relevant to the accusation.
Prior to each interview, an investigator must inform the accuser and any witnesses interviewed of their duty of confidentiality and that a violation of the duty of confidentiality constitutes dishonorable conduct in violation of this Code.
The investigators and all witnesses shall not discuss or share with other members of the Council any information required to be held in confidence, or any other information acquired in the course of the investigation that may bear on the truthfulness of the accusation(s) being investigated.
In no case may an investigator participate as a panel member at any hearing in which he or she is an investigator.
Determination of Probable Cause
Upon completion of their investigation, and no later than ten (10) school days after all investigators are appointed, the investigators shall determine whether probable cause exists to proceed with an Honor Council Hearing.
Probable Cause exists if the investigation has revealed reasonable, credible, and corroborative information that the accused has committed the alleged acts. Probable Cause shall only be found upon a majority vote of all three Investigators.
The investigators shall submit to the Honor Council President a written report including:
A determination of whether probable cause exists;
A summary of evidence supporting the conclusion reached in a. above; and
Summaries of all interviews.
This report will be further shared only with the Prosecutor to use for a subsequent Honor Code violation hearing.
The accused may admit guilt, pursuant to 5.02; however, the investigation shall be completed and the investigators shall report their findings to the Honor Council.
If Probable Cause is not found, the names of the accused and the accuser shall not be disclosed and the proceedings shall be dismissed. Once a case has been dismissed, no new accusations regarding the same nucleus of facts may be brought against the accused. The President shall collect all written materials regarding the accusation and these materials shall be sealed for one year and then destroyed.
If Probable Cause is found to exist, the Honor Council shall determine whether the nature of the violation warrants suspension or expulsion for the purposes of determining whether outside counsel will be permitted. At this time the names of the accuser and supporting witnesses shall be disclosed to the accused. The President shall then appoint a member of the Honor Council to be the Prosecutor; however, this Prosecutor may not be a member of the Investigation Team from the same investigation.
The matter shall then be set for a hearing within fifteen school days of the finding of Probable Cause.
Notice to the Parties
Notice of Investigation. Notice of the Honor Council's decision to investigate a potential violation shall be sent to only the accuser and the accused along with a copy of the current Honor Code.
Notice of Dismissal. If after a complete investigation, as set forth in 4.02(c), the Honor Council determines that the results of the investigation do not indicate Probable Cause that the accused has violated the Code; the President shall notify the accused and the accuser that the matter has been dismissed.
Notice of finding of Probable Cause. If Probable Cause is found to exist, the President shall notify the persons specified in 4.02(a).

Article V
Code Violations: Hearing Procedure
5.01 The Rights of the Accused
Representation
Only cases in which the accused is charged with an Honor Code violation that warrants the sanctions of either suspension or expulsion, may the accused retain legal or other outside counsel to appear as an advocate for the accused. The counsel may represent the accused in all phases of the process after the accused has been formally charged with an Honor Code violation that warrants the aforementioned penalties. Counsel shall furnish the Honor Council President with written Notice of Appearance, indicating current name, address and telephone number. After notice of appearance is filed, the counsel shall be sent copies of all communications and documents sent to the accused.
In all other cases where the honor code violation does not warrant the sanctions of expulsion or suspension, the accused may select up to two (2) student advocates as defined in 5.01(b), to appear as advocates for the accused. Advocates shall furnish the President with a written Notice of Appearance indicating their current name, address and telephone number. After a notice of appearance is filed, the advocate shall be sent copies of all communications and documents sent to the accused, who shall be sent all original communications.
Student advocates have a duty of zealous advocacy.
Student Advocates
Any law student wishing to act as an advocate/defender to represent and assist a student during the Honor Council hearing shall submit a letter of intent with the Honor Council.
These letters of intent will be made available to the accused student facing an Honor Council hearing.
5.02 Admissions of Guilt
The accused shall have the option of admitting guilt as charged without submitting to a hearing. The accused shall stipulate in writing that he or she committed the alleged acts, that the commission of the acts constitutes a violation of the Code, and that the accused is waiving the right to a formal hearing.

An announcement shall be placed on the UDSL Student Bar Association window and in the Honor Council file in the Zimmerman Law Library to the effect that:

A Law student has decided to accept sanctions in the face of an Honor Council Hearing after having been charged with …(here will follow a brief description of the charge.)
Such announcement shall neither reveal the identity of the student involved, nor the specific facts, but shall be a broad description of the violation.
Upon the concurrence of the investigators and the President, the accused may admit to the commission of one or more violations of the Honor Code other than those specified in the original charges. If the evidence warrants, one or more original charges may be dismissed, and the accused will be sanctioned on the admitted offense.
No representation that a specific sanction will be recommended or imposed shall be made by any member of the Honor Council in exchange for an admission of guilt under (a) or (b) of this section.
The Honor Council is free to reject an admission of guilt if the investigation determines more offenses have been committed than those to which the accused has admitted guilt. In this case a hearing will take place.

5.03 Discovery

No discovery shall be permitted in Honor Council proceedings except as follows:

At least five (5) school days prior to the hearing, the Prosecutor shall furnish the accused student with a list of witnesses who will testify against the accused with summaries of the substance of the testimony of each and copies of any documents that will be introduced into evidence by the prosecution.
At least three (3) school days prior to the hearing, the accused shall furnish the Prosecutor with a list of the witnesses who will testify for the accused, summaries of the substance of their testimony, and copies of any documents that will be introduced in evidence by the accused.
Only witnesses identified by the list of either the prosecutor or the accused shall be permitted to testify unless the Honor Council for good cause permits otherwise.
5.04 The Hearing Panel
A seven (7) person panel of the Honor Council, shall be chosen at random by the President to sit at each hearing.
Except as provided in 3.06(c) and 5.03, no voir dire or discovery shall be allowed with respect to the hearing panel.
5.05 Rules for the Honor Code Hearing
Formal rules of evidence and procedure do not apply. The hearing shall be conducted with as much informality as is consistent with the purpose of the inquiry. The Honor Council President, however, shall have the right to exclude evidence that is not relevant pursuant to 5.06(c).
Unless the accused waives a closed hearing, the only persons permitted to attend will be the accused, his or her advocates, the Honor Council Panel, the alternates, the faculty advisor, the appointed prosecutor, the Honor Council President, and witnesses.
In the event the accused does not attend the hearing, but remains enrolled, the hearing shall be held in his or her absence.
The hearing shall be recorded in its entirety by audio or video tape recording, as determined by the Honor Council President.
Prior decisions of the Honor Council are not binding precedent, but may be cited as persuasive authority. The moving party shall have the burden of establishing the existence of such authority.
The accused shall have the right to remain silent and no adverse inferences shall be drawn therefrom. The accused shall be presumed not guilty until guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Honor Council President shall regulate the order and nature of questioning. The Honor Council President shall have the right to exclude testimony irrelevant to the charge(s) being prosecuted.
The Honor Council hearing shall be held within fifteen (15) school days of the determination of probable cause absent joint consent of the prosecutor and the accused.
5.06 Honor Council Hearing Procedure
If necessary, the Honor Council President shall schedule a motions hearing prior to the Code violation hearing. The parties shall submit written motions at least three (3) school days prior to the motions hearing. The President shall decide if additional oral argument is to be allowed. The same panel as appointed for the Honor Code violation hearing shall rule on motions submitted. A simple majority is required to decide motions.
Restatement of the Charge
At the commencement of the Honor Council hearing, the Honor Council President shall inform the accused that the Honor Council has information of an alleged Honor Code violation and shall describe the nature of this alleged violation.
The President shall also remind the accused of the right to question witnesses, the right to call and question all witnesses, the right to testify, and the right to give a closing statement at the end of the hearing.
Witness and Evidence Introduction
Formal rules of evidence do not apply.
Oral testimony must be taken only under oath, administered by the Honor Council President.
Each party shall have the right to give an opening statement, to present evidence relevant to the issues, to cross-examine opposing witnesses, to impeach any witness regardless of which party first called the witness; to rebut evidence presented by the other party, and to give closing statements.
Any relevant evidence shall be admitted if it is the type of evidence on which reasonable, prudent persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of their affairs. Hearsay evidence may be used to supplement or explain other evidence, if relevant and probative. The rules of privilege shall be effective to the same extent they are now or hereafter may be recognized in civil actions in the state of Ohio.
The President may limit the amount of relevant but marginally probative evidence. Irrelevant, inflammatory or unduly repetitious evidence shall be excluded.
Any evidence relating to polygraph examinations or their results is inadmissible, in any form, in any proceeding under this Honor Code.
Burden of Proof
The Prosecutor has the burden of proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, each violation of the Honor Code charged. The accused shall be presumed not guilty until guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Deliberations and Decision of the Hearing Panel
Immediately after all evidence has been presented and all arguments have been made, the panel shall meet in private to determine whether the accused has committed the violation with which he or she is charged.
A determination of guilt by the Honor Council requires a concurrence of five (5) of the seven (7) members of the hearing panel. A decision that a violation has occurred must be based upon the evidence presented at the hearing.
If a determination of guilt is not made, all concerned parties shall be notified in writing and the proceedings shall terminate.
If, during the course of its deliberations, the panel determines that the accused may have committed a violation different from or in addition to that charged, or that another student may have committed a violation, these possible violations shall be reported to the Council for further investigation, but should not be considered in the deliberation of the current charge.
Imposition of Sanctions
After a determination of guilt, the hearing panel will recommend by majority vote the appropriate sanctions to the Dean.
Specific sanctions may include but are not limited to one or more of the following:
Expulsion from the School of Law;
Suspension from the School of Law with the opportunity to apply to the Appeals Committee for readmission after a specified period of time;
Suspension for a definite period of time, with or without a refund of tuition, in accordance with the University of Dayton’s tuition-refund policies;
Suspension or loss of specific benefits provided by UDSL including privileges, memberships, honors, and/or scholarships;
Probation for a definite period of time under specified terms or conditions with consequences specified for noncompliance;
Removal from any student organization office or position from any other UDSL sponsored position of trust, responsibility or interest;
Denial of participation in any UDSL or University of Dayton sponsored extracurricular or organizational event for a definite period of time;
Private written warning or reprimand, including a letter for the student’s permanent school file;
Verbal warning;
Prohibiting or restricting access to and/or use of UDSL or University of Dayton facilities or services;
Monetary or other restitution for damage to UDSL property; and
Public or University of Dayton service.
No record or indication of a student’s involvement as an accused in council proceedings shall be made a part of the student’s permanent file unless and until the Dean of UDSL accepts the panel’s decision.
Emergency Suspension Pending Disposition of Honor Code Complaint. In extreme and unusual situations, the Honor Council may request and the Dean of UDSL may approve the suspension of any student from UDSL pending the investigation and prosecution of an Honor Code accusation if probable cause has been found that the student engaged in and will continue to engage in intentional conduct that:
seriously disrupts and interferes with the operation of the University of Dayton;
seriously endangers the physical safety of other students, faculty, or staff of the University; or
inflicts serious emotional distress on other students, faculty or employees of the University.
5.07 Deleted

5.08 Post-Hearing Procedure
Notice of Hearing Panel Decision
The Honor Council shall submit its verdict, written opinion and recommended sanctions to the Dean of the Law School within five (5) school days after the verdict is rendered.
Following final approval by the Dean, the President of the Honor Council shall notify the accused of the verdict orally and in writing within twenty- four (24) hours after the final approval. The notice shall include:
specific findings of fact;
dissenting statement(s), if any; and
sanctions to be imposed by the Dean.
Written Opinion of the Honor Council
The President shall designate a member of the Council to write the majority opinion, which shall include:
specific findings of fact;
the Honor Council's decision;
the sanctions imposed;
the reasoning and evidence supporting the recommended penalty; and
the names of the Council members concurring in, and dissenting from, the opinion.
The opinion shall be placed in a file to be held by the President of the Honor Council and to be made available only for precedential value at future Honor Council proceedings. .
Preserving the Hearing Records
The President shall seal and date all hearing records at the conclusion of the proceeding. Such records shall be preserved in a locked place under the control of the Dean for three years, and shall not be opened except upon a motion to the Honor Council showing a compelling reason for inspection. The current President shall ensure that all Hearing records on file are destroyed within three years of the date the verdict is rendered.
An announcement shall be placed on the UDSL Student Bar Association window and in the Honor Council file in the Zimmerman Law Library to the effect that:

The Honor Council has found a student to be guilty of the following offense (here will follow a brief description of the charge.)
Such announcement shall neither reveal the identity of the student involved, nor the specific facts, but shall be a broad description of the violation.

Article VI
Miscellaneous
6.01 Miscellaneous
The deadlines for reporting and the occurrence of the proceedings shall be suspended during examination periods and days in which the school is not in session and the full Summer session except for good cause shown. All Accusation Forms relating to alleged incidents from the previous Spring and Summer semesters must be filed with the Honor Council within in the first ten (10) school days of the Fall semester.
In the case of an alleged violation involving a third year student during the Spring semester examination period, a special panel of two (2) Honor Council members and three (3) faculty members will be appointed by the Dean and the President of the Honor Council to investigate and submit its recommendation to the Dean. The Council will convene within reasonable time limits to facilitate the prompt adjudication of the case and submit a recommendation to the Dean prior to commencement.
All timelines in this Code are aspirational and should not be modified without good cause shown. However, missing a deadline shall not be determinative in assessing the guilt or innocence of the accused nor an automatic barrier to proceeding.
The Honor Council President shall keep a permanent file containing interpretations of the Honor Code made by the Honor Council. These interpretations shall be considered non-binding precedent.

Article VII
Process for Amending the Honor Code
Process for Amending the Honor Code
In order to substantively amend the Honor Code
A student shall submit in writing amendment language to the Honor Code with fifty (50) current student signatures; or
The Honor Council shall submit in writing amendment language to be posted in the Student bar Association office for a notice and comment period of five (5) days.
After consideration by the Honor Council, the amendment shall be enacted by a two-thirds (?) vote of the Honor Council in an Honor Council general business meeting.
The Honor Council may make editorial and grammatical amendments that do not affect the substance of the Honor Code without notice to the student body.

B - 2: Policy on Academic Dishonesty

Approved by the Faculty, March 31, 1978
Approved by the President of the University, May 12, 1978

As an institution of higher learning, the University of Dayton expects its faculty and administration to be instrumental in creating an environment in which its students can develop personal integrity.

I. DEFINITIONS

Student academic dishonesty is defined as any attempt by a student to obtain, or to assist another student to obtain, a grade higher than honestly earned.

In addition to specific conditions stated by the course instructor, the following are defined as academic dishonesty: cheating; plagiarism; grade alteration; and deception to avoid meeting the stated course conditions.

CHEATING

Cheating consists of any of the following:

For Examinations: Willfully copying or attempting to copy work from another student's paper; consulting or attempting to consult notebook, textbook, or any other source of information not specifically authorized by the teacher; willfully aiding or receiving aid from another student during an examination or attempting to give or receive such aid; obtaining or attempting to obtain copies of the examination prior to the time the examination is given; or any other act which violates or attempts to violate the stated conditions of an examination.

For Assignments: When class assignments are such that students are expected to complete the assignment on their own, willfully copying all or part of another student's assignment or attempting to violate or violating any stated conditions of the assignment.

PLAGIARISM

Plagiarism consists of any of the following:

Quoting directly from any source of material--including other students' work and materials purchased from research consultants without appropriately citing the source and identifying the quoted material; knowingly citing an incorrect source; using ideas (i.e., material other than information that is common knowledge) from any source of material--including other students' work and materials purchased from research consultants--without citing the source and identifying the borrowed material.

The instructor is expected to establish any additional guidelines for plagiarism and should make clear to the students their individual responsibilities on assignments.

GRADE ALTERATION

Grade alteration consists of any act which dishonestly modifies a grade obtained for a class assignment, examination or for the course itself.

DECEPTION

Deception is defined as any attempt to avoid meeting the stated course conditions, such as making false statements to avoid taking examinations at the scheduled times or to avoid turning in assignments at scheduled times.

II. PENALTIES AND PROCEDURES

The maximum penalty for a proven case of academic dishonesty is an "F" in the course. No provision can then be made for the student to receive a "W". Under some circumstances, such as repeated offenses, theft, intimidation, or breaking and entering, additional penalties may be imposed by the student's Dean. These penalties may include dismissal from the major, dismissal from the School or College, removal from Honors Programs, or dismissal from the University.

When an accusation of dishonesty occurs, the faculty member must notify the student immediately and in private of the accusation and penalty. If, after a private discussion between the faculty member and the student, the student admits the dishonesty and accepts the penalty, the student's Dean will be notified in writing of the violation. This is to be a confidential notification with the only other authorized copy to go to the student. If, after the private discussion, the student does not admit dishonesty or accept the penalty, the faculty member alleging the dishonesty will notify, in writing, the student's chairperson and Dean, the faculty member's chairperson and Dean, and the student. In either case such notification will became part of the Dean's official file on the student but will not be transmitted outside the University.

III. APPEAL PROCEDURE

A student who feels an accusation of academic dishonesty is unfair may appeal in the sequential manner listed below:

If no resolution occurs in the private conversation with the instructor, the student may appeal to the chairperson of the department in which the course was taught. This appeal must be made in writing within 10 days after the written notice and must state the facts as the student sees them. The faculty member also submits his/her evidence at this time to his/her department chairperson.

If the student's appeal is denied by the department chairperson, the student has 10 days to file an appeal to the Review Committee of the College or School in which the violation occurred. In departments where a Grade Appeal Committee already exists, this will be the Review Committee. The Review Committee will first select a chairperson, and then meet with the student and faculty member involved on separate occasions and gather any additional evidence or information related to this appeal. "The student has the right to see and hear the evidence and to question any witnesses against him/her and to present evidence and witnesses on his/her own behalf," (Student Handbook, p. 48) Both the student and the faculty member must cooperate with the Review Committee.

The Review Committee will make known its recommendations and the reasons for its recommendations in writing to the department chairperson(s), the student, the faculty member, and the Dean(s).

If the accusation is judged a violation and the penalty appropriate, a record will be sent to the student's Dean. If no violation can be proven, all material pertaining to the accusation will be returned to the faculty member.

Either the student or the faculty member involved may then make an appeal to the Dean of the College or School in which the course was offered. A final appeal may be made to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost. The final authority rests with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost.