Contrary to law or policy. A faculty member may allege on appeal that, during the campus-based process, controlling law or University policy was disregarded, misinterpreted, or misapplied to the facts of the case.
During its review, the board of trustees considers whether the campus-based process or decision had material procedural errors, was clearly erroneous, or was contrary to controlling law or policy.
In reviewing whether a decision was clearly erroneous, the board of trustees considers whether the evidence introduced at the hearing and reviewed by the chancellor is such that a reasonable fact finder could find the applicable burden of proof, clear and convincing, was met.When conducting its review, the board of trustees does not reweigh the evidence, express its independent judgment on the factual issues, determine credibility of witnesses, or otherwise conduct the same review that would be conducted by the chancellor.Instead, the board of trustees views the record in the light most favorable to the judgment below and decides if the evidence in support of that decision is reasonable, credible, and of solid value, such that a reasonable fact finder could find that discharge or serious sanction is appropriate based on clear and convincing evidence.
After review on appeal, the board of trustees may affirm the chancellor’s decision; or, if the board finds that the campus-based process or decision had material procedural errors, was clearly erroneous, or was contrary to controlling law or policy, the board may remand the matter to the chancellor to provide for a new hearing or a supplemental review inquiry.