Pride v. Howard University

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• declining to read a quorum rule for Howard’s Judiciary Board into the Code of Conduct, which was “silent” on the matter
• accepting parties’ assumption that the Code of Conduct printed in the student manual constituted a part of the contract between the university and its students
• accepting parties' assumption that the Code of Conduct printed in the student manual constituted a part of the contract between the university and its students
• university code of conduct provisions constituted contract terms based on the university’s “usual practices surrounding [the] contractual relationship”
• “[T]he usual practices surrounding a contractual relationship can themselves be raised to the level of a contractual obligation.”
• “Contracts are written, and are to be read, by reference to the norms of conduct and expectations founded upon them. This is especially true of contracts in and among a community of scholars, which is what a university is.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).