University of Wisconsin Law School — Dismissal & Appeals

Written by Zachary Gaynor, attorney · The Florida Bar, admitted 2016 · court admissions. Reviewed October 31, 2026.

Who decides whether a UW law student is dismissed?

A faculty committee, the Retentions Committee, decides at the University of Wisconsin Law School, and the trigger is arithmetic: a weighted average below 2.0 after the first two semesters makes a student “ineligible to continue unless the Retentions Committee permits continuation” (Law School Rule 7.01). A unanimous denial is final; a split vote can go to the full faculty (Rule 7.05).

Misconduct runs on a different track, through UW–Madison under Wis. Admin. Code chs. UWS 14 and UWS 17 — and the Law School tells the Board of Bar Examiners, which certifies character and fitness under the diploma privilege.

The 2.0 line is measured at two points, and each second chance works once

• After the first two semesters (Rule 7.01): the Committee “may grant permission to continue or start over upon such conditions as it deems appropriate to the individual case or may deny permission.”
• After any later term (Rule 7.02): the student may continue but must reach 2.0 “by the end of the semester in which the student is next enrolled,” or “may not continue thereafter.”
• No stacking (Rule 7.03): a student the Committee allowed to continue cannot later use the 7.02 recovery, and the 7.02 recovery works only once. The one exception is a single extra semester to bring a graduating average to 2.0.
• Time limits (Rule 7.06): no J.D. within six years of matriculation, or no first-year courses within two years, means ineligible without Committee permission.
• The first-year writing course (Rule 3.11): failing the retake of a semester of Legal Analysis, Advocacy, and Writing means the student “must petition the Retentions Committee for permission to continue in Law School.”

A 2.0 is a C (Rule 2.01). Chapter 7 never uses the word “probation”; the single-use recovery in Rule 7.02(2) is the closest thing to it. Leaving does not reset the clock: a student whose average makes them “subject to retention rules, may not re-enter without the consent of the Retentions Committee” (Rule 1.07(5)).

A unanimous “no” is final — so read the vote count first

Rule 7.05 requires that a denied student “be advised in writing of the Committee’s action and of the vote by which it was taken.” A unanimous decision, “provided a quorum of at least three voting Committee members is present,” is “final, with no further right of review” — except for a discrimination appeal under Rule 12.03(1)(b).

If the vote was split, the student may petition the Dean for review by the full faculty, “stating the facts and arguments on which the student bases their request,” and “may, but need not, appear personally before the faculty.”

I treat the Committee petition as the whole case: after a unanimous denial there is no second hearing.

What the Rules leave out: deadlines, a standard, and the lawyer question

Rule 7.01 lets a student “have a faculty member or other person assist in presenting the case.” The Rules say nothing about lawyers either way, so ask the Dean’s office in writing, before the meeting, who may attend and who may speak.

Not published: any deadline to petition the Retentions Committee or the full faculty, and the Committee’s procedures, membership or decision standard.

The grade itself is hard to move. Rule 2.11: “There shall be no appeal from a grade on the allegation either that the grader misapplied the criteria for grading the exam, or that the criteria were themselves ill-chosen.” A reported grade changes only for “an error in computation, or an error in transcription.”

The retake petition is the overlooked route. Under Rule 6.09 the Petitions Committee may allow a retake where the grade was “caused by circumstances such as serious illness or great emotional distress,” and the retake grade then “shall control for all purposes” — without the usual C cap. Where one bad semester caused the deficit, file it beside the retention petition.

The Petitions Committee cannot review Retentions Committee actions (except discrimination appeals) or academic misconduct (Rule 12.03(2)), and it must summarily dismiss a request for relief from a rule brought more than six months after the event (Rule 12.04). Discrimination appeals run on 15-calendar-day steps after an Office of Compliance finding (Rule 12.05).

Cheating, plagiarism and AI: Law School rules, University process

The Law School Student Handbook: “In addition to the Law School Rules, students are subject to the Student Conduct and Disciplinary Rules” of UW–Madison — UWS 14 for academic misconduct, UWS 17 for nonacademic. The campus process is on the UW–Madison page.

Rule 6.11 bars “collaboration with, or assistance from, other persons or generative artificial intelligence tools” unless the instructor permitted it “in writing,” and under Rule 3.20, where an instructor sets no AI policy, “student use of generative AI in academic work including, but not limited to, exams is prohibited.” The syllabus and any written permission are the first documents to collect.

As published, ch. UWS 14 gives a student:

• 10 days to request a hearing from “personal delivery or mailing of the written report” (UWS 14.06(3)(c), 14.07(5)(c)1.), and “‘Days’ means calendar days” (UWS 14.02(4)).
• “The right to be accompanied by a representative of his or her choice” (UWS 14.08(3)(a)).
• For suspension or expulsion, a finding only if “the proof of such misconduct is clear and convincing” (UWS 14.08(3)(e)).

In a nonacademic case seeking suspension or expulsion, the advisor “may be a lawyer” and may “speak on behalf of the respondent” (UWS 17.12(4)(b)).

The diploma privilege: why a finding at UW Law reaches the license

Under Supreme Court Rule 40.03, a graduate of a Wisconsin law school fully approved by the ABA meets the legal competence requirement without a bar exam, on credits the law school certifies to the Board of Bar Examiners. The Law School’s version is Rule 3.04: a 2.0 weighted average in at least 30 credits across ten mandatory subjects, and a 2.0 in the 60 highest-graded credits in designated courses. Those are separate tests from the degree’s 2.0 (Rule 9.01), so on the face of the rules a student can earn the J.D. and still miss the privilege.

Character and fitness is the Board’s call. “The board shall certify to the supreme court the character and fitness of qualifying applicants” (SCR 40.06(3)), after “certification from the dean of competence” (Board rule BA 6.05). The Law School feeds that file:

• SCR 40.06(5): the dean has “a continuing duty to report to the board any information reflecting adversely” on an applicant’s character and fitness.
• The Handbook: “The BBE will also receive information about academic misconduct during law school from the Law School.”
• BA 6.02(b) makes “academic misconduct” cause for further inquiry, and SCR 40.06(3) requires the Board to decline to certify an applicant who “knowingly makes a materially false statement of material fact.”

So the wording of a resolution — what was found, under which rule, at what standard — travels into the character review. The Rules still carry a 1970 dean’s memo, kept “because it continues to be good advice”: “it is essential to tell more rather than less.”

If the Board moves toward denial, it sends an “at risk” notice, and the applicant has 30 days from mailing to request a hearing (SCR 40.08(1)–(2)) — a Wisconsin licensing proceeding that calls for Wisconsin counsel.

Why the written petition carries the weight

UW–Madison is public, but academic dismissals call for “far less stringent procedural requirements” (Board of Curators v. Horowitz, 435 U.S. 78, 86 (1978)), and courts defer unless a decision is “such a substantial departure from accepted academic norms” that no professional judgment was exercised (Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214, 225 (1985)). So the petition — the facts behind the grades, the documentation, and the conditions proposed for continuing — is where a Rule 7.01 case is made.

Where the governing documents are

Verified as loading on 31 October 2026:

• Chapter 7, Eligibility to Continue (modified 3 October 2025) — law.wisc.edu
• Chapter 12, Petitions and Appeals (modified 1 November 2024) — law.wisc.edu
• Chapter 3, Course Rules (Rules 3.04, 3.11, 3.20; modified 2025) — law.wisc.edu
• Chapters 1, 2, 6 and 9 (all on the Rules index) — Ch. 1, Ch. 2, Ch. 6, Ch. 9
• Appendix A, Materials Pertaining to Bar Admission (1970 memo) — law.wisc.edu
• Law School Student Handbook: “Academic Misconduct” (updated 20 May 2026), “Nonacademic Misconduct” (updated 2 June 2026), “Wisconsin Diploma Privilege Requirements” (updated 29 August 2025) — 154274, 154279, 153990
• SCR Chapter 40 with the BA rules (amended through 24 March 2026) — wicourts.gov
• Wis. Admin. Code chs. UWS 14 and UWS 17 (Register November 2024 No. 827) — UWS 14, UWS 17

Not public: the Retentions Committee’s procedures, membership, petition deadline and decision standard; the deadline for a full-faculty petition; the Petitions Committee’s own procedures (Rule 12.02); whether a lawyer may attend or speak before either committee; and whether an academic-standing decision, as opposed to misconduct, is reported to the Board. All are worth requesting in writing.

Related reading

• Law school dismissal and academic standing
• Professionalism and fitness-to-practice findings
• Due process at public institutions
• Public or private? A due-process decision tree
• Wisconsin student defense

Other Wisconsin 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 Wisconsin schools:

• Medical College of Wisconsin
• UW School of Medicine and Public Health — Dismissal & Appeals
• Marquette University
• Marquette University School of Dentistry — Dismissal & Appeals
• Marquette University Law School — Dismissal & Appeals

Common questions

How low does my GPA have to fall before UW Law can dismiss me?

Below a 2.0 weighted average on the 4.3 scale. After the first two semesters that makes you ineligible unless the Retentions Committee permits you to continue; after a later term, most students get one semester, once, to recover (Rules 7.01–7.03).

Can I appeal a Retentions Committee denial?

Only if the vote was not unanimous. A unanimous decision with at least three voting members present is final under Rule 7.05; a split decision can go to the full faculty by petition to the Dean, and discrimination claims have their own route.

Can a lawyer come with me to the Retentions Committee?

The Rules allow “a faculty member or other person” to assist and do not mention lawyers. Ask in writing, before the meeting, who may attend and speak.

Will a misconduct finding affect the diploma privilege?

It can reach the character and fitness review. The Law School’s handbook says the Board of Bar Examiners receives academic misconduct information from the Law School, and the Board’s rules make it cause for further inquiry.

How long do I have to respond?

Ten calendar days to request a hearing on a UWS 14 academic misconduct report. The Rules publish no deadline for a Retentions or full-faculty petition, so get the date in writing and work as if it were short.

Can a lawyer help me prepare the petition?

Yes. A lawyer can help prepare the petition or appeal, and the work is handled case by case; a flat-fee Full Read + Game Plan is described on the fees and scope of services page.

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