No. 22-5274

Joseph Covell Brown v. Marcus Porter, et al.

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-08-03
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP Experienced Counsel
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-rights disciplinary-proceedings due-process higher-education ministerial-tasks procedural-due-process qualified-immunity
Key Terms:
ERISA SocialSecurity DueProcess FirstAmendment Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2022-09-28
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the right to procedural due process in disciplinary proceedings involving suspension, expulsion or loss of housing in publicly funded institutions of higher education is clearly established

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED In 2017, Joseph Brown was expelled from NSU despite being denied the due process afforded by the school’s disciplinary policy. His appeal was denied despite glaring errors in his expulsion. The Questions Presented are: Whether the right to procedural due process in disciplinary proceedings involving suspension, expulsion or loss of housing in publicly funded institutions of higher education is clearly established by the consensus of circuit court holdings. Whether the right to procedural due process in disciplinary proceedings involving suspension, expulsion or loss of housing in publicly funded institutions of higher education is clearly established by general constitutional principles. Whether qualified immunity shields government officials who fail to perform ministerial tasks. Whether qualified immunity shields government officials who assume discretionary authority that is not vested in them. Whether qualified immunity shields government officials who fail to follow the published procedures applicable to their tasks.

Docket Entries

2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-08-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-08-08
Waiver of right of respondent Marcus Porter, in his individual capacity, et al. to respond filed.
2022-08-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 2, 2022)

Attorneys

Joseph Brown
Stephen C. LeckarKalbain Hagerty LLP, Petitioner
Stephen C. LeckarKalbain Hagerty LLP, Petitioner
Marcus Porter, in his individual capacity, et al.
Andrew Nathan FergusonOffice of the Attorney General, Respondent
Andrew Nathan FergusonOffice of the Attorney General, Respondent