University of Michigan-Dearborn Student Defense Lawyer

UM-Dearborn students sometimes assume their case will run under Ann Arbor’s rules. It will not. The Dearborn campus publishes its own Statement of Student Rights and Code of Student Conduct for nonacademic matters and its own Academic Code of Conduct for integrity cases, and the campus’s own offices decide them. The right documents are the Dearborn documents.

How do student discipline and dismissal cases work at UM-Dearborn?

The University of Michigan-Dearborn is a public institution, so the Fourteenth Amendment applies. Under Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975), a disciplinary suspension requires notice and an opportunity to respond, and longer separations require more. Dearborn sits in the Sixth Circuit, where Doe v. Baum, 903 F.3d 575 (6th Cir. 2018) — decided about the Ann Arbor campus of this same university — requires public universities in credibility-based disciplinary cases to allow cross-examination. On the academic side, Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (1985) gives universities heavy deference, which makes the disciplinary-versus-academic classification the first thing to pin down in any Dearborn case.

Where do UM-Dearborn cases come from?

Nonacademic matters run under the Statement of Student Rights and Code of Student Conduct, with records maintained by the Dean of Students and the process run through the campus’s student conduct and conflict resolution function. Integrity allegations run under the separate Academic Code of Conduct, and — as at every campus with large online and commuter enrollment — a growing share arrive as similarity or AI-detection referrals, the software-evidence problem covered on the academic misconduct page. For a commuter campus, the practical pattern is distinct: cases turn less on residence-hall incidents and more on coursework, exams, and off-campus conduct that the code reaches in defined circumstances. The general framework is on the student conduct defense page.

Which process are you in, and why does that matter?

The two codes are the point: an integrity case and a conduct case at Dearborn run under different documents with different procedures, and academic-standing decisions form a third track. Under Board of Curators of the University of Missouri v. Horowitz, 435 U.S. 78 (1978), courts defer far more to academic judgments than to disciplinary findings, so which document governs your case sets both the process now and the review available later. Read the notice for the code it cites, and confirm the citation is right — mislabeled cases happen, and the label is contestable.

What should you do first?

Pull the current version of whichever code your notice cites from UM-Dearborn’s own site — the Dean of Students area at umdearborn.edu is the entry point — along with your syllabus. Write down the deadline, request your file, and preserve drafting history, submission timestamps, and messages before they are gone. Do not explain first and read second; a statement given before you know the evidence is the most common self-inflicted wound in these files.

What can a student defense lawyer do here?

• Reading the governing policy against the charge or decision letter
• Preparing your account, your documents, and your questions
• Testing whether the campus followed its own published procedures
• Scrutinizing software-based evidence, including AI-detection and similarity reports
• The written response and appeal, to the extent the policy permits
• Serving as your advisor where the process allows it
• Negotiating sanction terms, notations, and disclosure language

How much of that happens in the room and how much happens on paper depends on the advisor provisions in the code that governs your track — which is one more reason the reading comes first.

The federal money on the line at UM-Dearborn

University of Michigan–Dearborn students and families took on $20.7 million in federal Direct Loans in the 2025–26 award year — 1,604 undergraduates with subsidized loans and $5.4 million in unsubsidized graduate borrowing.

Every dollar of it rides on academic standing. A dismissal, a failed Satisfactory Academic Progress evaluation, or a mid-term withdrawal sets off federal rules that decide whether aid continues, whether money already disbursed has to go back, and — under the borrowing caps in effect since July 1, 2026 — whether a student who leaves can still finance a return. The academic fight and the financial aid fight are the same fight, and the windows are short. How those rules work: SAP appeals and academic dismissal.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, Federal Student Aid Data Center, Direct Loan volume by school, award year 2025–26 (cumulative through June 30, 2026). University-wide federal Direct Loan totals.

Common questions about UM-Dearborn student cases

Do Ann Arbor’s procedures or precedents apply to my Dearborn case?

Your case runs under Dearborn’s own published codes and offices. The constitutional floor — Goss, and the Sixth Circuit’s cross-examination rule for credibility-based disciplinary cases — applies because the campus is public, but the procedures themselves are Dearborn’s, and arguing from the wrong campus’s rules helps no one.

My case is built on an AI-detection score. How do those cases get defended?

With your own materials: drafting history, version files, notes, and a syllabus that defines what was permitted. Detection tools have known error modes, and the campus’s own integrity procedures still require proof — a score alone is an accusation, not a finding.

I received a dismissal letter for academic standing. Is there anything to do?

Usually there is a published appeal or reinstatement route with a short window, and the strongest arguments tend to be procedural — requirements the campus’s own policy imposed on itself. See academic dismissal and suspension, and the fees and scope page for the Full Read + Game Plan starting point.

Nearby Michigan schools: University of Michigan, Wayne State, Eastern Michigan, and Lawrence Tech. The full list is on the Michigan student defense page.

This is general information about the matters I handle and the law that applies to them. It is not legal advice about your situation, and the law in this area can change. For advice on your matter, start with the Full Read + Game Plan — your entire file read, straight answers, and exactly what to do next, in what order.

This page is informational and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by the institution named on it.

Attorney advertising. Zachary Gaynor is licensed in Florida, admitted to the federal district courts in Florida, Colorado, northern and southern Illinois, Nebraska, New Mexico, and western Wisconsin, and not licensed in Michigan; Michigan matters are handled through the framework described on the nationwide practice page — federal-law assessment, campus-process support where the school’s policy permits an advisor, and association with local counsel or pro hac vice admission where required.