Concordia University Wisconsin Student Defense Lawyer

Students reach me about Concordia University Wisconsin at three points: when a faculty member files an academic ethics report over a paper or an exam, when the Dean of Students sets an Initial Administrative Resolution meeting, and after the Registrar’s Office emails an academic dismissal that drops them from future enrollment. All three run on short clocks counted in business days, and all three are decided on a written record built in the first week.

How do student discipline and dismissal cases work at Concordia University Wisconsin?

Concordia University Wisconsin is a private nonprofit university, and that one fact reorganises everything else on this page. A private university is not a state actor, so the Fourteenth Amendment does not reach it and the public-campus due process cases do not control. What governs instead is contract: the Code of Student Conduct, the academic catalog and the published academic policies are the promise the university made when you enrolled. On top of that sit the statutes reaching any school that takes federal money — Title IX, Title VI, and Section 504 with the ADA — and the accreditor’s requirements. The contract theory is set out on the page about breach of contract, and the accommodation questions on the page about 504 and ADA accommodations.

Wisconsin publishes the strongest campus discipline rules of the states I practice in, and none of them apply here. Chapters UWS 14 and UWS 17 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code — the rules giving a University of Wisconsin student a committee hearing, written findings of fact, a clear and convincing burden before suspension or expulsion, and, under UWS 17.12(4)(b), an advisor who may be a lawyer and who may question witnesses and speak for the student when suspension or expulsion is on the table — are promulgated by the Board of Regents under Wis. Stat. § 36.35(1). UWS 17.02(10) defines the institutions they reach as the universities of that system. Concordia is not one. A student who reads those chapters and expects the same rights in Mequon is reading the wrong book. Nor is the ch. 227 review route used against the Board of Regents available here; a claim against Concordia is an ordinary civil action for breach of contract, so the internal process is not a rehearsal. It is where the case is won or lost.

Where do Concordia University Wisconsin cases come from?

Concordia enrolls about 5,253 students and is more complicated than that number suggests. The catalog carrying the Code of Student Conduct also covers the Ann Arbor campus, extended-campus locations and online programs, and the university is organized into schools, each headed by a dean. So the first question in an academic case is which school your course sits in, because an academic ethics appeal goes to the dean of the school that offered it, not to a central office.

The Mequon campus is residential, and the Code devotes a full article to residence life, listing housing relocation and temporary or permanent housing removal as sanctions separate from university suspension. Referrals come from ordinary places. A faculty member files an academic ethics report over a paper or a take-home exam, increasingly on the strength of software output rather than a witness. A residence hall incident becomes an alcohol charge, or a conflict becomes a Title IX complaint routed to the Title IX Coordinator rather than the Dean of Students.

The stakes are set by the sanction, not the label. Academic dismissal drops you from future enrollment and keeps you out for at least one semester. A second dismissal requires six credits earned elsewhere at a 2.0 or better before you can be considered again, and a third is permanent. For a student in a sequenced program, a semester out is rarely a semester; it is a missed cohort start and usually a year. That is why the negotiation over the sanction is often worth more than the argument over the finding.

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

Concordia runs four tracks and they do not share a clock. Academic dishonesty is not handled under the Code of Student Conduct at all: the Academic Ethics policy puts the first penalty in the faculty member’s hands and sends the appeal to the dean of the school within 15 working days. Non-academic conduct runs through the Dean of Students, the Initial Administrative Resolution meeting and a formal hearing, on three-business-day clocks. Sexual misconduct goes to the Title IX Coordinator. Academic standing is a Registrar’s Office calculation involving no finding that you did anything wrong, on fixed calendar deadlines unrelated to either.

Answering in the wrong track spends the only response you get, and three business days is short enough that a week of confusion ends it. Match the letter to the track first: academic misconduct, conduct code charges, Title IX, or academic dismissal and suspension.

What should you do first?

Get the policy in force on your incident date from Concordia’s own catalog, not a summary, and read the appeal section before the prohibited conduct section. The catalog carries a dated edition on its face, and the edition that governs you may not be the one on screen today. Then collect the syllabus, the assignment instructions and any lab or clinical policy. What the syllabus permitted on collaboration, sources and software is usually the strongest document in an academic ethics file, and the faculty member wrote it.

Put the dates in writing. Email the Dean of Students and ask for the date of your Initial Administrative Resolution meeting, the deadline for the Outcome Appeal Form, and a copy of everything the decision-maker will see. Preserve drafts, version history, repository commits, learning management timestamps, group chats and clinical evaluations before anything auto-deletes. Do not sit for the meeting before you know what is alleged; the finding is often made in it. If the accusation rests on an AI-detection score, read the page on AI accusations first.

What does Concordia University Wisconsin’s own policy actually say?

Concordia publishes its Code inside the academic catalog rather than as a loose handbook, which helps, because catalog editions are dated and archived. Some fields are stated plainly, others are not published at all, and this list says which is which.

• Conduct office: the Code of Student Conduct, administered by the Dean of Students, with the Chief Student Success Officer above that office.
• Governing policy: the Code of Student Conduct in the undergraduate academic catalog. No system-wide state policy governs Concordia. Wis. Admin. Code chs. UWS 14 and UWS 17 reach only University of Wisconsin institutions under UWS 17.02(10), and the Wis. Stat. ch. 38 framework governing the technical colleges does not apply.
• Academic integrity: a separate track, not part of the Code. The Academic Ethics policy leaves the first penalty to the faculty member — redo the assignment, a reduced or failing grade on it, a lower or failing grade in the course, or removal from the course. A second instance goes to the Chief Academic Officer; a third to the Academic Conduct Board, which may suspend or expel.
• Appeal window: in a conduct case the Outcome Appeal Form is due within three business days, hearing results issue within three business days of the hearing, and a procedural or omission appeal is due within three business days after it. The Vice President of Student Success or designee decides within three business days of the final response memorandum, and that decision is final. The grounds are a procedural error or omission that significantly affected the outcome, new evidence, or a sanction outside the designated range. In an academic ethics case the appeal goes to the dean of the school within 15 working days and is answered within 10 working days.
• Standard of proof: preponderance of the evidence. The Code states that in all cases of alleged violations of University policy the standard of proof is the preponderance of the evidence, meaning more likely than not.
• Advisor: allowed. The Code entitles a reporting or responding party to one advisor of their own choosing throughout the investigation and resolution, and says the advisor may be a friend, mentor, family member, attorney or any other supporter, but not another person named in the reported violation. The Code does not say whether the advisor may speak. No campus-specific rule on the advisor’s speaking role located; confirm it in writing before the meeting. UWS 17.12(4)(b), which lets a lawyer speak for a UW student facing suspension or expulsion, does not reach Concordia.
• Academic standing: published in the academic probation policy. Standing is calculated at the end of each semester in which you enroll in six or more credits, and good standing is a 2.0 cumulative and a 2.0 semester GPA. A cumulative GPA below 2.0 puts you on Academic Probation I, on notice from the Registrar’s Office; stay below it without reaching a 2.0 semester GPA and you are dismissed. The Academic Standards Committee reviews reinstatement on an Academic Reinstatement Form, filed by July 1 for fall, October 1 for spring and March 1 for summer.
• Title IX and equal opportunity: the Title IX Coordinator.

Because the Code lives in a dated catalog edition, the text on screen today may not be the one that governs your case. Ask the Dean of Students in writing which edition was in force on your incident date, and keep the answer.

What can a student defense lawyer do here?

A federal claim arising at Concordia University Wisconsin — Title IX, Title VI, or Section 504 and the ADA — is filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, which covers Milwaukee and the eastern counties. I am admitted to the bar of the Western District of Wisconsin and handle Eastern District matters together with counsel admitted there. Because Concordia is private and not a state actor, there is no Fourteenth Amendment claim here, and the contract claim is a state-law claim. Very few of these matters reach court. What decides them is the campus record:

• Reading the governing policy against the charge or decision letter
• Preparing your account, your documents and your questions
• Testing whether the school followed its own published procedure
• Scrutinising software-based evidence, including AI-detection and similarity reports
• Helping with the written response and the appeal, where policy allows
• Serving as your advisor where the process permits one
• Negotiating sanction terms, notations and disclosure language

What a lawyer can do inside Concordia’s process turns on the Code, and the Code answers half the question: you may bring one advisor, and the advisor may be an attorney. It does not say whether that advisor may speak. Settle that in writing beforehand. Where a decision is final, the questions shift to the record and the grounds, covered under appeals and court review.

Other Wisconsin universities

Every school writes its own dismissal, appeal and conduct rules, and the filing deadlines are rarely the same from one campus to the next. These pages set out the procedure at other Wisconsin universities:

• Edgewood University
• Herzing University
• Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwe University
• Lakeland University
• Lawrence University
• Maranatha Baptist University

Common questions about Concordia University Wisconsin student cases

Do the Wisconsin UWS rules apply at Concordia University Wisconsin?

No. Chapters UWS 14 and UWS 17 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code are promulgated by the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents under Wis. Stat. section 36.35(1), and UWS 17.02(10) defines the institutions they reach as the universities of that system. Concordia is a private nonprofit university. The UW hearing rights, the clear and convincing burden before suspension or expulsion, and the rule letting a lawyer speak for a student do not apply here. What governs at Concordia is its own Code of Student Conduct, read as a contract.

Can I bring a lawyer to a Concordia conduct meeting?

You may bring one advisor of your choosing, and the Code says that advisor may be a friend, mentor, family member, attorney or any other supporter. The advisor may not be another person named or involved in the same reported violation. What the Code does not say is whether the advisor may speak. No campus-specific rule on the advisor speaking role located, so ask the Dean of Students in writing before the meeting and keep the answer with your file.

How long do I have to appeal at Concordia University Wisconsin?

It depends on the track. In a conduct case the Outcome Appeal Form is due within three business days, and a procedural or omission appeal is due within three business days after the hearing. In an academic ethics case the written appeal goes to the dean of the school in which the course was offered within 15 working days of the report, and the dean answers within 10 working days. Reinstatement after academic dismissal runs on fixed dates instead: July 1 for fall, October 1 for spring, March 1 for summer.

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. Other campuses are covered on the Wisconsin student defense page.

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 to practice law in Florida and is admitted to the bars of the United States District Courts for the Southern, Middle, and Northern Districts of Florida, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, the United States District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts of Illinois, the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska, the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico, and the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. Federal court admission is not a license to practice the law of the state in which the court sits; he is not licensed in Wisconsin and does not advise on Wisconsin state law.