Note on Appeals

When drafting the Student Judicial Charter of 1997 (to replace its predecessor, the Legislative and Judicial Charter of 1968), the so-called “Committee of Fifteen” primarily devoted itself to recommending rules governing the process from its inception through the Judicial Panel hearing stage. It established the right to appeal, but was completely silent on implementation. However, in its Rationale section entitled “Board on Judicial Affairs,” the C15 empowered the Board on Judicial Affairs, as a standing committee, “to refine the judicial process on an ongoing basis as the community gains experience in its operation.” Based on experience, the Board has recognized the need to clarify the current guidelines used in the appeal process.

The following paragraph explaining appeals in general terms is intended to provide a context for Board discussion and approval of guidelines that are cogent and easily understood by all participants. While it is important to maintain a system as free from legalistic approaches/jargon as possible, the Board also should recognize that the system’s substantive and procedural aspects will continue to be scrutinized by courts of law when students sue the University claiming a panel’s decision was wrong and/or the proceedings were procedurally defective or otherwise improper. Thus, it is essential that the student judicial process from beginning to end be clear, fair, and consistently followed.

The Purpose and Scope of Appeals:

Generally speaking, the function of an appellate court is to review errors of law, not decide questions/issues of fact. While in practice, the line between fact and law may be difficult to draw with precision, the reviewing court nonetheless is charged with that responsibility. Appellate courts usually review only the written record from the trial court and, of course, the appeal and the response(s) to it. Oral presentation is at the court’s discretion. Appeal-related documents and oral presentation are legal arguments, not evidence. Even if there is conflicting evidence in the trial court’s record, on appeal there is a presumption in favor of the appropriateness of the verdict and the findings of fact. Even if a determination or inference other than that which was drawn by the trial court may appear to the appellate court more reasonable, it does not have the power to substitute its opinions or deductions for those of the trial court. For example, if an appellant claims the verdict is unsupported by the evidence, the power of the reviewing court begins and ends by determining whether there is any substantial evidence (contradicted or not) that supports the jury’s verdict; if there is such evidence, the verdict stands.