Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-University's motion for summary judgment in plaintiff-student's action under Title III of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), where defendant initially suspended plaintiff for semester for cheating on exam, and where defendant subsequently denied plaintiff's requests for readmission and told plaintiff that he would not be permitted to re-apply in future. While defendant had granted plaintiff's requested accommodation to receive extended time on tests and quizzes, record showed that plaintiff was cited for academic misconduct in 2013 for copying another student's homework and was cited again for academic misconduct in 2014 for submitting duplicate work of another student. In 2015, plaintiff was caught taking exam while using typed notes containing prohibited course slides, which formed basis of instant suspension. Incidents occurring in 2013 and 2014 were untimely because they occurred outside applicable two-year limitation period, and while 2015 claim was based on plaintiff's contention that defendant had failed to accommodate his ADHD and learning disabilities, plaintiff failed to explain why exception allowing plaintiff to use typed notes (without course slides) failed to accommodate his disability. Ct. also rejected plaintiff's breach of contract claim, alleging that defendant failed to follow its own procedures for suspending him, where Ct. found that any failure to follow said procedures did not constitute breach of contract, and where any failure to comply with said procedures fell within bounds of defendant's academic judgment.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Americans with Disabilities Act