Crook v. Baker

813 F.2d 88 (1987)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Crook v. Baker

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
813 F.2d 88 (1987)

Facts

Wilson Crook (plaintiff) received a master of science degree in geology and mineralogy from the University of Michigan (Michigan) (defendant). Crook’s thesis was based on a claim that he had discovered a previously unknown mineral, “texasite,” while on a field trip. The claims made by Crook were supported by data he submitted with his thesis, which were compiled using a microprobe and a computer program at Michigan, EMPADR, that was available to students and researchers. A year after Crook was awarded his degree, professors in the Geology and Mineralogy Department determined that Crook had likely fabricated his data and that texasite was not actually a newly discovered mineral. The professors based this on time-log records of EMPADR and their general belief that the data was too good to be true. Moreover, the chemical composition of texasite was very similar to a synthetic compound that had been produced in a Michigan lab. Crook denied any wrongdoing. When Crook attempted to replicate the results, it was discovered that he manipulated the data. In a letter to Crook, Michigan charged him with fabricating the data in his thesis, based on the analytical results, EMPADR’s time log, and the discovery that texasite was a synthetic compound. Crook was informed that a disciplinary committee would hear the matter and that his degree might be revoked. Crook had assistance from an attorney through the whole process. The hearing was informal. Crook presented evidence and witnesses. Although neither side was permitted to directly cross-examine witnesses, Crook himself was able to ask questions to witnesses. Both Crook and his attorney made statements to the committee during the hearing. Ultimately, the committee determined that Crook had lied about his data, and the board of regents (the board) voted to rescind his degree following a meeting at which Crook’s attorney argued on his behalf. Crook refused to give up, convincing a district court that he had been denied due process. Michigan appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Brown, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 734,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 734,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 734,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership