Southwest University of Naprapathic Medicine Student Defense Lawyer

Students reach me about Southwest University of Naprapathic Medicine at three points: when a faculty member reports academic dishonesty, when a clinic supervisor raises a conduct or professionalism concern during the internship, and after a grade below the threshold produces an academic warning or a dismissal letter. Each carries a short clock, and at a school that leads to a state licence the record follows you past graduation.

How do student discipline and dismissal cases work at Southwest University of Naprapathic Medicine?

SUNM is a private, for-profit institution. It is not a state actor, so there is no Fourteenth Amendment due process claim and no constitutional right to a hearing. Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975), Board of Curators of the University of Missouri v. Horowitz, 435 U.S. 78 (1978), and Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (1985) are cases about public campuses. Here the theory is contract — the catalog is the promise — plus Title IX, Title VI, Section 504 and the ADA, and the requirements of its accreditor, the Distance Education Accrediting Commission.

New Mexico law adds almost nothing. There is no general campus due process statute. NMSA 1978 § 21-1-51, the 2024 affirmative-consent statute, reaches public post-secondary institutions and does not govern a private school. No New Mexico statute sets a notice period, a hearing right, an advisor right or a standard of proof for a SUNM student. And the leading decision is a caution to the student: in Ruegsegger v. Board of Regents of Western New Mexico University, 2007-NMCA-030, 141 N.M. 306, 154 P.3d 681, cert. denied, the Court of Appeals held that although a student handbook “sets out a general framework of policies,” it was “not persuaded that the language contractually obligates WNMU to conduct any specific type of investigation, to provide support services, or to impose specific discipline.”

So a breach of contract case here is not built on the fact that a catalog exists. It is built on a specific promise the school made and did not keep: a stated day-count it ignored, a committee it did not convene, a written notice it never sent. SUNM’s catalog contains several of those specifics, which is why the first task is to read the edition in force on your incident date against what actually happened.

Where do Southwest University of Naprapathic Medicine cases come from?

SUNM enrols roughly 18 students. It is licensed by the New Mexico Higher Education Department under licence number 157 and accredited by the Distance Education Accrediting Commission. It teaches two programmes: the Doctor of Naprapathic Medicine, a 190 quarter-credit degree delivered about three-quarters online, and the Master of Science in Anti-Inflammatory Nutrition. It has a Santa Fe campus and a second location in Las Vegas, Nevada.

The clinical internship is where the serious outcomes happen. Third-year students complete it over a 52-week period, roughly fifty weeks at two days and twelve hours a week, clocking in and out in the clinic office, with schedule changes needing advance approval from the preceptor or clinician on duty. The catalog then adds disciplinary probation for excessive absence or tardiness, unacceptable conduct, uniform violations under the Intern Clinic Handbook, or drug or alcohol use, and says a student on that probation is closely monitored and can be dismissed for non-compliance. That is a professionalism finding in everything but name, decided by the supervisor who is also the witness.

It matters more here than at a general college because the degree leads to a licence. The catalog says a graduate must pass the National Board of Naprapathic Examiners examination in order to practise, and points to the New Mexico Medical Board rules for naprapathic practitioners. A clinical or conduct finding recorded now is a disclosure question at licensure later, which is why the wording of a sanction is often worth more than the argument about the finding. At a school this size the same one or two administrators write the warning, run the process and decide the appeal; credits transfer only case by case, as the catalog says plainly; and a dismissal usually ends the credential rather than delaying it.

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

The label on the letter picks the decision-maker and the clock, and at SUNM the tracks look alike from outside. Academic dishonesty runs to the faculty member and then, if you contest it, to the Academic Integrity Ad Hoc Committee. Conduct and attendance run through disciplinary probation and the dismissal policy, which the catalog describes without naming a hearing. Academic warning and probation are calculations made by the Chief Academic Officer involving no finding of wrongdoing. Financial aid standing is a fourth track with its own committee and form. Answering in the wrong one spends your only response.

Match the letter to the track first: academic misconduct, conduct code charges, academic dismissal and suspension, or a SAP appeal where federal aid is also at risk.

What should you do first?

Get the catalog in force on your incident date from the school itself, not from a summary. The public site sits behind a challenge that blocks automated requests, so ask the registrar in writing for the operative edition and keep the reply. Ask separately for the Intern Clinic Handbook: the catalog imposes discipline for breaching it but does not reproduce it, and an unpublished rule you were sanctioned under is a document you should see before you answer.

Then collect the evidence that decides these cases. In a dishonesty allegation, that is the assignment instructions, the syllabus rules on collaboration and software, your drafts, your file version history and your learning management timestamps. In a clinic matter, it is the clock-in records, the written approvals for schedule changes and every supervisor evaluation. Put your response deadline and your appeal deadline in writing. Do not sit for a meeting before you know what is alleged. If the accusation rests on an AI-detection score, read the page on AI accusations first.

What does Southwest University of Naprapathic Medicine’s own policy actually say?

The catalog is specific about grades, aid and dismissal, and silent about how a contested case is heard. This list says which is which rather than guessing.

  • Conduct office: the SUNM catalog carries the conduct policy, the disciplinary probation rule, the dismissal policy and the grievance procedure in one document, and routes written grievances to the President rather than a dean of students.
  • Governing policy: the SUNM catalog, the Intern Clinic Handbook it references but does not publish, and the catalog’s separate Harassment Policy. No New Mexico system code governs a private school; the UNM Pathfinder and NMSU ARP chapter 5 do not apply.
  • Academic integrity: in the catalog’s Academic Integrity Statement. An accused student either accepts the faculty member’s accusation or requests a hearing before the Academic Integrity Ad Hoc Committee, which decides it and can impose consequences from a mandatory ethics class up to expulsion, on top of any academic sanction the faculty member imposes. Cheating is defined to include using artificial intelligence to complete assignments.
  • Appeal window: an academically dismissed student may appeal in writing to the President within 10 days of receiving notification, and the catalog says that decision is final and may not be further appealed. A financial aid appeal goes to the SAP Appeal Committee within 10 days of the failure notice, addressed to the Registrar, with a decision in ten business days; late appeals are not accepted and one appeal is approved per degree. For a contested conduct charge, no campus-specific day-count located.
  • Standard of proof: the catalog does not publish one. No campus-specific standard of proof located, for the Academic Integrity Ad Hoc Committee or anything else; ask in writing which standard applies and keep the answer.
  • Advisor: the catalog does not say whether you may bring an advisor, whether the advisor may be a lawyer, or whether the advisor may speak. No campus-specific advisor rule located, and New Mexico supplies no default.
  • Academic standing: in the same SUNM catalog. A grade below 80 per cent in any class draws a written academic warning from the Chief Academic Officer and a required meeting with the President and the faculty member, and the Chief Academic Officer may remove the student from the clinic for the rest of the term. A grade point average below 3.0 brings academic probation for one quarter, and suspension for one quarter may be imposed. Satisfactory academic progress requires a 3.00 cumulative average, 66.7 per cent completion of attempted credits, and finishing within 150 per cent of programme length.
  • Disability accommodations: requests go to the Student Services Coordinator, with self-disclosure in writing and documentation from a licensed professional, under Section 504 and the ADA. More on accommodations.

The grievance procedure is worth reading closely, because it is the only process the catalog gives in full and also the narrowest. A complaint must be in writing to the President, who meets the student within five days, investigates, and issues written findings within ten business days of concluding the investigation; that decision is final within the school, after which the New Mexico Higher Education Department can be asked to facilitate a resolution. The catalog then excludes grades and sexual harassment, so the two complaints students most often bring are the two it does not cover.

What can a student defense lawyer do here?

A federal claim arising at Southwest University of Naprapathic Medicine — Title IX, Title VI, or Section 504 and the ADA — is filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico, where I am admitted to the bar. No pro hac vice motion and no sponsoring local attorney is needed. There is no Fourteenth Amendment claim, because a private school is not a state actor, and the contract claim is a state-law claim. Very few of these matters end in 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

Two carry particular weight here. The catalog publishes real deadlines and a named committee, so testing whether the school followed its own procedure is concrete rather than a general complaint. And because the President decides the dismissal appeal and that decision is final, the one letter is the case: complete, documented and on time.

Other New Mexico schools

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 New Mexico schools:

Common questions about Southwest University of Naprapathic Medicine student cases

Does using AI on an assignment count as cheating at SUNM?

Yes, and the catalog says so in as many words. Its definition of cheating lists using artificial intelligence to complete assignments alongside copying another student’s work and possessing unauthorized notes. That means an AI allegation at SUNM is a straightforward academic dishonesty charge rather than an argument about a policy gap. It also means the evidence question is everything. Detection scores are probabilistic, and the answer is usually your drafts, your version history and your timestamps, not a debate about the tool.

How long do I have to appeal a dismissal from SUNM?

Ten days. The catalog says a student who has been academically dismissed may appeal in writing to the President within ten days of receiving notification of the dismissal, explaining the circumstances that contributed to the academic problem and the plan to eliminate them. It then says the decision of the President is final and may not be further appealed. There is one written submission and one decision-maker, so the appeal letter has to carry the whole case. A separate financial aid appeal has its own ten-day clock.

Who actually decides a conduct case at SUNM?

The catalog does not set out a conduct hearing at all. It publishes a general conduct policy, a disciplinary probation rule and a dismissal policy listing the grounds, and it routes complaints to the President. Academic dishonesty is the one charge with a named body, the Academic Integrity Ad Hoc Committee, which a student may ask to hear the accusation. No campus-specific conduct procedure, decision-maker or day-count located for anything else. Ask in writing who will decide, on what standard, before you attend a meeting.

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 New Mexico 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 Court for the Southern District 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 New Mexico and does not advise on New Mexico state law.