Main Issue
The main issue raised in this case concerns the exclusion of Michael from the University for the failure of his exam, and the justification is his tutor’s statement about the student’s intention to cheat.
Relevant Legal Concepts
Some actions of other people can be treated incorrectly in case of parties’ nervous tension. Schubert and Samaha give an example of a wrongful act and differentiate this term with wrongful intent (263). Moreover, circumstances can be different, and the interpretation of the same situation can be ambiguous.
Relevant Case Law
In the case of Moore v. Student Affairs Committee of Troy State University cited by Schubert and Samaha, the student’s commitment is mentioned to fulfill all the provisions of a specific educational institution (268). At the same time, there is “the college’s or university’s duty to provide the appropriate environment for learning” (Schubert and Samaha 268).
Rationale
Despite the ambiguity of the situation, Michael cannot be accused of cheating since there were no obvious violations of the University’s order. The tutor’s assumptions were based on personal conclusions, and the consequences in the form of dismissal are too rigid.
Ruling
Michael should be reinstated and continue his education without penalty.
Work Cited
Schubert, Frank A., and Joel Samaha. Introduction to Law and the Legal System and Criminal Procedure. Cengage Learning, 2017.