Dell Medical School — Dismissal & Appeals

Written by Zachary Gaynor, attorney · The Florida Bar, admitted 2016 · court admissions. Reviewed 19 September 2026.

Who decides whether a Dell Med student is dismissed?

The Medical Student Academic Standing Committee — the MSASC, and it will be called that in every letter you receive — decides academic standing at the Dell Medical School. It is the body that places a student on academic warning, requires a course or a year to be repeated, suspends, or dismisses. The catalog says the committee meets at least twice a year, that its members must recuse themselves where a conflict of interest exists, and that the School will provide an opportunity for students to present before the MSASC at any time when their academic standing is to be voted upon.

That last provision is the one students skip past. Presenting to the MSASC costs nothing, happens before there is any decision to appeal, and is the only stage where the people who will vote hear you in your own words. By the time a grievance is filed, the committee has already written down what it thinks.

The ladder: good standing, academic warning, dismissal

Dell Med reports two standing classifications on the official transcript and keeps a third layer internally.

• Good standing — progressing through the prescribed curriculum and anticipated to satisfy graduation requirements.
• Academic warning — the catalog defines this as a student who, after extensive remediation, has either ultimately failed to progress in the curriculum, will be unable to satisfy graduation requirements indefinitely, or has committed or abetted severe misconduct. The published outline for placement is: failure to be promoted from one academic cohort to another for more than two consecutive academic years; more than two school-initiated academic leaves of absence; or committing or abetting severe misconduct as jointly deemed by the MSASC.
• Internal designations — a separate, non-punitive tracking layer the School states is not reported externally and exists to route academic support.

Read the qualifier attached to those triggers: the catalog says the outline may be “alternatively and holistically applied” by the MSASC. The published list is a floor for the committee’s discretion, not a ceiling. A student who does not meet any listed trigger can still be placed on warning, and a student who meets one has an argument that the holistic language cuts both ways.

The appeal ladder: three steps, and the clock is ten business days at each end

1. Written grievance to the MSASC Chair — 10 business days from the date the written notice of decision was received. The catalog requires the grievance to describe in detail the rationale and to propose a resolution. That second requirement is easy to miss and it is substantive: you are expected to tell the committee what outcome you are asking for.
2. Ad Hoc Appeals Committee hearing — within 30 business days of the grievance being received. The MSASC Chair appoints three faculty members, one of whom chairs. They may meet with any faculty member, administrator or other person to understand context. You may appear, make a statement and respond to questions. The Chair writes up the decision and must notify you in writing within 10 days of the hearing date.
3. Appeal to the Executive Vice Dean for Academics — 10 business days from receipt of that written decision. It must include a justification statement and copies of all documentation you provided to the MSASC. The Executive Vice Dean may meet with you or with others, and may affirm or modify the Ad Hoc Committee’s decision, with a written decision due within 10 business days. That decision is final.

You also have a stated right to meet with the Associate Dean for Student Affairs to review the process and to discuss preparing documentation for the Ad Hoc Appeals Committee. Use it early, and put the request in writing.

Whether you stay enrolled while you appeal depends on one word

This is the most consequential sentence in the Dell Med policy, and it turns on how the School labels your case. Any adverse action based on academic performance alone is deferred until the grievance is resolved. Adverse actions based on conduct or professionalism remain in effect while the grievance runs.

So a performance problem that gets written up as a professionalism problem costs you your seat for the months the appeal takes, before anyone has reviewed the merits. Professionalism findings are also the ones that follow a student into residency applications and licensure questions. If the decision letter uses professionalism or conduct language to describe what is really a failure to progress, that characterization is itself worth contesting in the grievance — not just the outcome.

The catalog closes the loop at the end: when the Executive Vice Dean rules, “all sanctions being deferred pending the resolution are immediately placed into effect.” There is no further internal step after that.

Bringing a lawyer to the hearing — what the catalog actually says

Dell Med permits a student to bring an ally to the Ad Hoc Appeals Committee hearing. If that ally is an attorney providing legal advice, the catalog requires that the Ad Hoc Appeals Committee Chair be notified 10 days before the hearing, and that an attorney representing the school be present.

Two practical consequences. First, the 10-day notice sits inside the 30-business-day scheduling window, so the decision about counsel has to be made near the start of the process, not the week of the hearing. Second, the School’s lawyer attends because yours does — which is an argument for having the written record built properly long before the hearing, where most of the work in these matters is actually done.

Grades run on a separate track

The grievance policy states expressly that it does not apply to grievances for a course or clerkship grade; those go through the Appeal of Grade Policy instead. Students routinely file the wrong one and lose the ten-day window on the decision that actually matters. If a failing clerkship grade is what triggered the standing action, there may be two separate clocks running at once.

Leave of absence is not a neutral pause

The School can initiate a leave where a student is unable to meet technical standards, is deemed to need leave for academic deficiency, or as a consequence and sanction for not upholding professional conduct expectations. The intent is presented to the MSASC for final approval, and the student has the opportunity to appear before the committee.

A student on leave is treated as having withdrawn — permanently exiting the program — by failing to remain in contact during the leave (the catalog defines this as three unreturned phone calls, three unanswered email messages and one unanswered certified letter), by failing to submit a Change of Enrollment Status form 60 days ahead of the approved return date, or by failing to request an extension within 60 days of that date. More than two school-initiated academic leaves is itself a listed trigger for academic warning.

What the law adds at a public medical school in Texas

Dell Med is part of The University of Texas System, so it is a public institution and a state actor, and a dismissal is reviewable under the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Three things follow that students, and some lawyers, get backwards.

The academic/disciplinary line decides almost everything. For an academic dismissal, Board of Curators of the University of Missouri v. Horowitz, 435 U.S. 78 (1978), requires no formal hearing at all — only that the student was fully informed of faculty dissatisfaction and the consequent threat to continued enrollment, and that the decision was careful and deliberate. For a disciplinary dismissal, meaning one premised on the violation of a rule of conduct, the student is entitled to notice of the charges and an informal give-and-take under Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975), and in Texas a formal hearing may be required. That is exactly why the catalog’s own performance-versus-professionalism labeling matters so much: it tracks the constitutional line, not just the enrollment consequence.

In Texas, the stigma question splits the same way. The Texas Supreme Court held in University of Texas Medical School at Houston v. Than, 901 S.W.2d 926 (Tex. 1995), that a medical student dismissed over a cheating accusation had a protected liberty interest in his reputation and in the future practice of medicine under article I, section 19 of the Texas Constitution, and it ordered a new hearing. But in Texas Southern University v. Villarreal, 620 S.W.3d 899 (Tex. 2021), the court held that an academic dismissal does not carry enough stigma to implicate a protected liberty interest under the federal constitution. The same loss of a seat gets materially less protection when the School writes it up as academic.

The Fifth Circuit has never decided whether the interest exists at all. It assumes it and moves to the merits — Davis v. Mann, 882 F.2d 967, 973 (5th Cir. 1989); Wheeler v. Miller, 168 F.3d 241, 247 (5th Cir. 1999); Shaboon v. Duncan, 252 F.3d 722, 730 (5th Cir. 2001). Shaboon is the one to read closely: the court treated a medical resident’s dismissal as academic rather than disciplinary even though behavioral concerns were in the file, because the core judgment was about clinical fitness. Substantive review under Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (1985), asks only whether the decision was beyond the pale of reasoned academic decision-making, and no Fifth Circuit decision has upheld such a claim in the academic dismissal context.

Do not count on a contract claim. At a private school the handbook and catalog are often the cause of action. In Texas, against a public university, they usually are not: Eiland v. Wolf, 764 S.W.2d 827 (Tex. App. 1989), held that catalog language promising a diploma on completion of the required courses did not give rise to an enforceable contract between the student and the university, and sovereign immunity bars breach-of-contract suits against University of Texas System institutions absent express legislative consent. The realistic routes run through federal court — procedural due process, and prospective relief against officials in their official capacities under Ex parte Young.

Put together, the winnable cases are usually the ones where the School departed from the procedure it published, or imposed a conduct sanction under an academic label. Both are questions about the record — which is why what you put in the file in the first ten business days matters more than the argument you make at the end.

Where the governing documents are

Verified as loading on 19 September 2026:

• The University of Texas at Austin Medical School Catalog, 2025–2026 — catalog.utexas.edu. The Academic Standing Policy, the academic grievance and appeal policy, the Appeal of Grade Policy, and the Leave of Absence, Withdrawal, and Dismissal Policy are all in this single document.
• Undergraduate Medical Student Policies, Dell Medical School — cloud.wikis.utexas.edu.

Save a dated copy of the catalog the day you receive a decision letter. Catalogs are revised between and sometimes during cohorts, and the version in force when the School acted is the one your case turns on.

Related reading

• Medical school dismissal and remediation
• What due process you are owed at a public university
• Academic dismissal and suspension
• Removal from a clinical rotation
• Grade disputes and grade appeals
• The University of Texas at Austin — student discipline overview

Other programs and campuses

Every school writes its own standing, appeal and conduct rules, and the filing windows are rarely the same from one campus to the next. These pages set out the procedure elsewhere:

• Texas student defense — schools and procedure
• UT Medical Branch
• UT Dallas
• UT San Antonio
• UF College of Medicine

Common questions

How long do I have to appeal a dismissal from Dell Medical School?

Ten business days from the date you received the written notice of the MSASC decision, filed as a written grievance with the Chair of the MSASC. The same ten-business-day window applies again at the final step, when appealing to the Executive Vice Dean for Academics.

Do I stay enrolled while my appeal is pending?

It depends on how the School characterized the action. Adverse actions based on academic performance alone are deferred until the grievance is resolved. Actions based on conduct or professionalism stay in effect while it runs, and any deferred sanction takes effect immediately once the Executive Vice Dean decides.

Can I bring a lawyer to my Dell Med appeal hearing?

Yes. The catalog allows an ally at the Ad Hoc Appeals Committee hearing, and where that ally is an attorney providing legal advice it requires notice to the committee chair 10 days before the hearing, after which an attorney representing the school will also attend.

Who makes the final decision?

The Executive Vice Dean for Academics. The catalog states that decision is final, and there is no further internal appeal after it.

Can I use the grievance process to challenge a clerkship grade?

No. The grievance policy excludes course and clerkship grades, which run through the separate Appeal of Grade Policy. If a grade triggered your standing action, both processes may need to be handled at once and on different clocks.

Is a Dell Med dismissal a breach of contract?

In Texas, against a public university, that claim is difficult. Eiland v. Wolf held that catalog language promising a diploma on completion of requirements did not create an enforceable contract, and sovereign immunity bars contract suits against University of Texas System institutions without express legislative consent. The practical routes are constitutional rather than contractual, which is the opposite of the analysis at a private school.

Does a dismissal from Dell Med end a medical career?

It closes the Texas licensure path as it stands. Texas Occupations Code § 155.003(a)(4) requires an applicant for a physician’s license to be a graduate of a medical school located in the United States or Canada and approved by the Texas Medical Board, and section 155.003(b) requires that United States medical education be accredited by a body recognized by the U.S. Department of Education. Without the degree there is no license. That is also why the reasoning recorded in your file matters well past the School: every residency application and licensure questionnaire will ask, and they are answered against whatever the record says.