Carroll University Student Defense Lawyer

Students reach me about Carroll University at three moments: when a faculty member turns an assignment problem into an academic integrity referral, when the Office of Student Conduct schedules a hearing, and, usually too late, after a decision letter has already set a sanction. All three run on short internal clocks, and all three are decided on a record built in the first few days.

How do student discipline and dismissal cases work at Carroll University?

Carroll University is a private nonprofit institution. That single fact sets the shape of every case here. Carroll is not a state actor, so the Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to what it does to you, and the constitutional arguments that work at a University of Wisconsin campus or a technical college are unavailable. The theory against a private university is contract: the handbook, the code and the catalog are the promise, and the claim is that the university did not keep it. Layered on top are the federal statutes that follow federal funding rather than state action — Title IX, Title VI, and Section 504 and the ADA — along with the requirements of Carroll’s accreditor. That is the subject of the page on breach of contract.

Two Wisconsin points matter more here than anywhere else. First, chs. UWS 14 and UWS 17 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code do not reach Carroll. UWS 17.02(10) defines “institution” as “any university, or an organizational equivalent designated by the board,” meaning the University of Wisconsin campuses. So the ten-day hearing request in ch. UWS 14, the clear-and-convincing burden that UWS 14.08(3)(e) and UWS 17.12(4)(f) require before a suspension or expulsion, and the famous sentence in UWS 17.12(4)(b) — “an advisor of the respondent’s choice. The advisor may be a lawyer” — give you nothing at a private university. Anyone quoting ch. UWS 17 at Carroll is quoting the wrong book.

Second, there is no administrative appeal out. Wis. Stat. § 227.52 review and the thirty-day petition clock in § 227.53(1)(a) apply to state agencies, and a private university is not one; common-law certiorari under Ottman v. Town of Primrose, 2011 WI 18, ¶35, reviews public bodies, not private ones. When Carroll’s internal appeal is exhausted, what is left is a civil action on the contract, or a federal civil rights claim. Be honest about the ground: no published Wisconsin appellate decision squarely settles how far a private university handbook binds the university, so the strength of a contract claim turns on how specific and how mandatory Carroll’s own written promises are.

Where do Carroll University cases come from?

Carroll enrolls roughly 3,138 students in Waukesha, small enough that a single decision-maker often handles a case from report to sanction, and small enough that the outcome follows a student through the rest of the degree. Its undergraduate and graduate health science programs place students in clinical and field settings, and those placements are where the most serious outcomes happen.

A clinical or practicum program is sequenced. One separated term is rarely one term: the next section starts the following year, so a suspension of a single semester usually costs twelve months, a cohort and a clinical site. That is why the sanction, not the finding, is often the part worth fighting hardest, and why the wording matters — whether a separation is recorded, how it is described, and what a licensing board or a graduate program will later see. Conduct in a placement is also frequently reframed as a fitness question rather than a rules question, which is a different argument with a different record; see professionalism findings.

The volume cases look different. Academic integrity referrals now come heavily out of online and hybrid coursework, often beginning with a similarity score or an artificial-intelligence detector flag rather than with anything anyone observed. Carroll’s residential population also produces the alcohol and controlled-substance cases the university sanctions on a published schedule, with fines of $100, $150 and $200, assessment or education programs, parental notification, probation, suspension, termination from housing and dismissal from the university.

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

The label on the letter picks your decision-maker, your clock and your protections. A conduct code charge goes to the Office of Student Conduct and is decided by a hearing officer in an administrative hearing. An academic misconduct allegation typically starts with the instructor and can end in a grade consequence that never reaches the Office of Student Conduct at all. A Title IX or sexual misconduct complaint runs on a separate policy with its own procedure. Academic standing is not discipline: it is a grade calculation, and nobody finds that you did anything wrong.

Answering in the wrong track spends the only chance you get. A careful email to a professor does nothing about a conduct hearing with a clock running, and a procedural objection does nothing about a grade point average. Note one Carroll rule before you decide how to respond: the university states that students are required to comply with requests from the Office of Student Conduct, including participation in the hearing process. Silence is not a neutral option here, so plan the response rather than skip it.

What should you do first?

Get the current Student Handbook from Carroll’s own source and save a dated copy, because the handbook is republished each academic year and the version that governs you is the one in force on your incident date. Read the appeal section before the violations section. Then collect the syllabus, the assignment instructions and any course policy on collaboration, notes and artificial intelligence; in an integrity case what the syllabus actually permitted is usually the strongest document in the file. For a clinical or field course, add the program handbook and the evaluation form.

Then move on documents and dates. Carroll allows a student to request the documented details of the incident, but that request must be made more than twenty-four hours in advance of the hearing, so make it the day the notice arrives rather than the night before. Ask the Office of Student Conduct in writing for your response deadline and your appeal deadline, because the university does not publish those numbers on its conduct page. Preserve drafts, version history, learning management timestamps, group chats and evaluations before anything is overwritten, and do not walk into a hearing before you know what is actually alleged.

What does Carroll University’s own policy actually say?

Carroll publishes a conduct overview online and the operative text in its student handbook. Some fields are stated plainly; others are not published, and this list says which is which.

• Conduct office: the Office of Student Conduct, which receives reports through the Student Conduct Report form, assigns a hearing officer, holds the administrative conduct hearing and decides responsibility.
• Governing policy: the Carroll University Student Code of Conduct, published inside the Student Handbook. No Wisconsin administrative code chapter governs it. Chapters UWS 14 and UWS 17 reach only the University of Wisconsin campuses, and the Wisconsin Technical College System codes reach only the sixteen technical colleges.
• Academic integrity: not published on the conduct page, which addresses behavioral matters. The academic integrity policy and its appeal route live in the handbook, so ask the Office of Student Conduct or your dean in writing which document governs an integrity referral and who decides it.
• Appeal window: no campus-specific day-count located. Carroll publishes the grounds but not the clock. An appeal must rest on one of four grounds: “Procedural error that prevented a fair decision”; “Material misstatement or misapplication of the University rules, regulations or polices alleged to have been violated”; “Decision not supported by substantial evidence”; or “Material evidence or facts newly discovered which could not with reasonable diligence have been discovered and introduced at the hearing.” Ask for the deadline in writing the day your decision letter arrives.
• Standard of proof: stated, and lower than the Wisconsin public-campus standard. Carroll writes that “the term ‘more likely than not’ is the standard of proof used in all conduct proceedings. It is equivalent to the legal standard of ‘preponderance of evidence.’” There is no clear-and-convincing tier for suspension or expulsion, because ch. UWS 17 does not apply.
• Advisor: allowed, and silent. “Students are permitted to have advisors present in their hearing. However, Advisors are intended to serve as a supportive/informative measure and may not communicate with the hearing officer(s).” The policy does not say whether the advisor may be an attorney. Ask in writing before the hearing.
• Sanctions: written warning, fines, assessment or education programs, parental notification, probation, suspension, termination from housing and dismissal from the university.
• Academic standing: published in the Carroll University student handbook. That file is served from a location that blocks automated retrieval, so its academic standing thresholds, appeal route and deadlines could not be verified here. Download it yourself, and confirm the standing appeal route with your dean in writing.
• Disability accommodations: Student Accessibility Services. If an accommodation request, a denial or an undiagnosed condition sits behind the conduct or the grades, raise it on its own track as well; see 504 and ADA accommodations.

What can a student defense lawyer do here?

A federal claim arising at Carroll University — 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, and Waukesha County sits in that district. I am admitted to the bar of the Western District of Wisconsin and handle Eastern District matters together with counsel admitted there. A contract claim against Carroll is a state-law claim. Very few of these matters end in any 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

At Carroll the answer to what a lawyer can do in the room is unusually clear on one half and unstated on the other. An advisor may attend and may not communicate with the hearing officer, so the work is done before the hearing and in the written record. Whether that advisor may be an attorney is not published, which is a question to settle in writing rather than at the door. Once a decision is final, the fight moves to the four appeal grounds and the record behind them; see 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:

• Concordia University Wisconsin
• Edgewood University
• Herzing University
• Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwe University
• Lakeland University
• Lawrence University

Common questions about Carroll University student cases

Do chapters UWS 14 and UWS 17 apply at Carroll University?

No. Carroll is a private nonprofit university, and those chapters bind only the University of Wisconsin campuses. UWS 17.02(10) defines the covered institutions as universities or an organizational equivalent designated by the board. So the ten-day hearing request, the clear-and-convincing burden before a suspension or expulsion, and the rule that your advisor may be a lawyer are not rights you can claim at Carroll. What governs is Carroll’s own Student Code of Conduct, read as a contract, together with the federal civil rights statutes.

What standard of proof does Carroll University use in a conduct case?

Carroll states it plainly. The term “more likely than not” is the standard of proof used in all conduct proceedings, and the university says it is equivalent to the legal standard of preponderance of the evidence. That single standard applies whatever the sanction. There is no higher clear-and-convincing tier for suspension or expulsion, because the administrative code chapter that creates that tier reaches only University of Wisconsin campuses. In practice it means a hearing officer needs only to find your responsibility more probable than not.

Can I bring a lawyer to a Carroll University conduct hearing?

You may bring an advisor. Carroll writes that students are permitted to have advisors present in their hearing, but that advisors serve as a supportive or informative measure and may not communicate with the hearing officer. Whether that advisor may be an attorney is not stated in the published policy, so ask the Office of Student Conduct in writing before the hearing rather than finding out at the door. Because the advisor cannot speak, the real work is the written response and the documents you assemble beforehand.

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.