• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Judge Dismisses Court Case by Lisa Coffey this was the dilemma the two entitled to summary judgment in sides faced: that the Union has failed to Judge Cecil F. Poole denied "The University of San comply with the requirement of the motions for summary Francisco and the U.S.F. the fact finding agreement that judgment which both the Faculty Association have each each party submit a three-year University and the Faculty moved for summary judgment proposal, it having submitted a Association presented to the herein. The Union seeks one-year proposal instead." Court and ordered the case summary judgment on the Further, the University itself dismissed last Friday morning, ground that it and the University moves for summary judgment at the District Courthouse. have entered into an agreement directing the Union to submit a The two sides were to submit their contract three-year proposal, or, in the represented by Stewart proposals to final and binding alternative, dismissing the Weinberg, for the FA, and fact finding, that the Union had Union's petition to compel James Boddy, representing the complied with the terms of this arbitration on the ground that University. agreement, and the University the parties failed to reach any According to a Supplemental has refused to do so. agreement to arbitrate." Memorandum, filed in the U.S. Dr.Maclntryrc represents Ad­ "In response, the University . While Dr. lehmann repre­ Judge Poole, at the beginning District Court on February 22, ministration. maintains that the Union is not sents the FA. of the pre-trial hearing, asked (Photo by Ted Brooker) (Photo by Ted Brooker) the two lawyers, "What's your problem hereT The two sides then began the heated argument that lasted for nearly an hour. What the situation actually till: EOIMiMiMrL. boils down to is the problem of a misunderstanding about the length of the new contract. The University favors the three-year contract, while the FA is still opting for the one-year contract. The University believes that the FA, at some point during the September negotiatings. tied itself to a three-year proposal. Volume 74, No. 5 March 9, 1979 The FA denies this. UNIVERSITY OF SAN FRANCISCO continued page 3 USF Faces Multi-Million $ Suit by Usa Coffey University of San Francisco, attempted by various wrongful Gary L. Stevens (former acts and defamatory statements David Mullen, Professor of Chairman of the Department of to have plaintiff David A. Mullen Biology is suing USF in excess Biology and presently Associate wrongfull denied tenure at USF, of $2.5 million, citing the fol­ Dean of Sciences at USF), including, but not limited to, lowing complaints that deserve Robert Schooley (a faculty acts by which defendants: caused restitution: conspiracy, member of the Department of certain unfair tenure review infliction ot emotional distress, Biology), Edmond J. Smyth procedures to be adopted for, libel and slander, invasion of (former Academic Vice and used in said plaintiffs tenure privacy, interference with President of USF), Lloyd D. review; acted in violation of said prospective advantage, and false Luckmann (former Dean of Arts adopted procedures in reviewing imprisonment. and Sciences at USF), Anthony him for tenure: attempted to During a recent visit to the law Seidl (former Provost of USF), interfere with an unbiased and office of Wendel, Lawlor, Rosen William C. Mclnnes (former independent review of said & Black, the firm representing President of USF), Cornelius plaintiff for tenure by the USF Mullen, a copy of the complaint Buckley (at one time acting Committee on Academic Rank against USF was made available Dean of Arts and Sciences at and Tenure; and published to the Foghorn. The complaint USF) and Edward V. Stack­ certain defamatory statements was filed on February 14 in the poole (Dean of Sciences at concerning him ..." San Francisco Superior Court. USF). As previously stated in the The following are some ofthe Other defendants being sued Foghorn, actions allegedly taken major factors contained in the in the case are referred to by the by some of the defendants document. The plaintiffs in the fictitious names DOES I-L. resulted in the loss of a grant case are David Mullen and his According to he complaint, from the Environmental wife Frances. Mullen believes that beginning Protection Agency and the loss The defendants are: The Professor Mullen believes there was a on, or about October, 1972, and of a prospective teaching conspiracy against him. (Photo by Ted Brooker) continuing until the present appointment at U.C. Berkeley. there has been a conspiracy Other actions taken by the among the defendants defendants that "attempted to Senate Approves S.W.S. Charter mentioned above, which was continued page 2 designed to invade the privacy by Theresa Hudson between the faculty and President, who ultimately make of Mullen, intertere with the In an exceedingly lengthy administration was very clear the decision. Said Lehmann, opportunities and advantages of Senate Meeting Tuesday. March about what was required, but "Denial of tenure is obviously a his profession and to defame 6, nearly two hours were spent in Index that the standards had been death sentence to a person's him. It further states that all of heated discussion about whether changed, indicating a violation employment here." these actions caused Mullen and or not to charter a new News 1, 2 , 3, of contract. He also added, "I A teacher must apply for his wife a "great mental nervous organization called the Society believe that those people who tenure during his fourth year. If and emotional stress." 14, 15 of White Students (SWS). The have been active in the Faculty he does not he is fired, but if he is The complaint indicates that purpose ofthe new group was the Association have been dealt with denied he may file a grievance Opinion 4,5 factor in question. all of the action taken and more harshly than those who and go to arbitration if no statements made by any of these Dr. Lehmann. head of the were not so active." resolution can be made. Of last mentioned defendants "were Faculty Association, came to the Inside Look 6,7 In describing the process by year's 21 rejections five cases done, caused to be done, made, Senate to discuss the promotion which teachers receive went to arbitration but only one and caused to be made with the and tenure decisions which were promotion or tenure, he said that decision has been made. Lehmann approval, consent, confirmation made this semester. He said that x 9, 10 the decision is made by the Dean said, "Of the people denied and ratification of each of the Entertainment student evaluations are very of the college in which the tenure, I would expect most will „, . f . important and must be used teacher works. Next, all of the " , otheThre defendantsdocument, traces what because evidence of proficiency deans meet to review each other's file grievances... it s hard to allegedly took place during the Sports 11, 12, 13 in the areas of teaching, service, decisions and finally, the believe that th. e, cro. p which tenure reviews commencing in and research must be presented. decisions are sent to the demonstrablapplied thiys inferioyear r towa sthos soe ^^ , „ He stated that the contract University Vice-President and continued page 2 of 9?2 defendams Page 2 San Francisco Foghorn March 9, 1979 S.W.S. Gains Charter From Senate from page I who applied last year." Two- had endorsed the concept of a be changed, so that it would not thirds of the teachers who budget ballot, had agreed that sound racial. SBS feared that the applied this year were rejected such a ballot should not be formation of SWS would cause whereas two-thirds were granted distributed during elections,and tension. their requests last year. would like to attempt a trial run. Admitted John Herder, "It In his President's report, without committing the budget. started as a joke... our purpose is Aaron Lee stated that budget He wants to distribute the ballots not to create racial tensions." deadlines were not met. and a soon, but he stressed that the SWS was already passed special budget session will be ballots will have no impact on through Clubs Council. Student held Sunday to accommodate what events the money is Kathy Tamashiro represented those who submitted late allocated to this year because the Hawaiian Club and budgets. Lee also vetoed the students must first form a addressed the Senate saying "you allocation for typewriters which perception of what they are have no right to prevent this club was made last week, but his veto actually allocating. from forming." was overridden later in the During the Activities report it Roseanna Marchetti suggest­ meeting. was noted that ASUSF funds ed that SWS change their name Fred Schleup reported that his Senator Charles Wall voices his opinions about S.W.S currently cannot be used to and write an original task force for budget balloting purchase alcohol for ASUSF constitution. Jeff Jackson stated events. A motion was made that not passing SWS might be which would permit organiza­ deemed reverse discrimination. Mullen Sues University tions to purchase alcohol for In the final vote, SWS was from page I ASUSF events with ASUSF chartered 10-5. with one annoy, harass, vex, anger and held on Tuesday afternoon at those whom the complaint is funds on the basis that alcoholic abstention. humiliate..." Mullen in, or 4:30 p.m. and those persons directed against. beverages enhance the events. A Erin Buckley resigned as around June. 1973 according to involved would be there to The contesting sides then task force led by Fred Schleup Governance Committee the complaint were as follows: discuss the problem.

Load more

  16

Copy Link