Page 2-A-Thursday, September 4, 1980-The Michigan Daily Judge ponders Marwil trial d By HOWARD WITT As University administrators and faculty members anxiously awaited a verdict, a federal district judge earlier this month pondered his decision in a lawsuit that could have major implications for untenured junior faculty here. U.S. District Judge Philip Pratt was expected to deliver a verdict before September in a case that pitted a former assistant professor-claiming he was unjustly denied a review of his qualifications to receive tenure-against his department, College, and the Regents-claiming his con- tinued presence on the faculty would be detrimental to the University. IN HIS UNPRECEDENTED suit against the University, Jonathan Marwil, an assistant professor in the engineering humanities department who was dismissed from his position after six years, originally sought more than $1 million in damages or reinstatement to the faculty pending a tenure review. Off the University'payroll since May 31, 1979, Marwil is suing the Regents and three members of the humanities department administrative committee: Department Chairman J.C. Mathes and Profs. Ralph Loomis and Dwight Stevenson. Marwil charges the committee members deliberately sidestepped applicable department and College policies requiring that he be granted a tenure review in his sixth year as an assistant professor at the University. THE UNIVERSITY CONTENDS that University-wide policies were followed in Marwil's case and that depar- tment administrators were justified in terminating his con- tract because the outspoken assistant professor's "abrasiveness" was detrimental to the department. Specifically, administrative committee members have cited what they alleged to be Marwil's intemperate and contentious behavior, as well as questionable scholarly production and worsening student evaluations, as reasons for their concern about his effect on the humanities depar- tment.. When he originally initiated his suit in the summer of 1979, Marwil alleged that his right of freedom of speech was violated by the administrative committee, that committee members acted with malice when they terminated his con- tract, and that the University was guilty of several contract violations. DAMAGES SOUGHT AT the outset amounted to $1.1 million-to be received from the individual Regents and the three committee members-although Marwil consistently stressed that his real objective was a court-ordered tenure review, not financial gain. A series of University dismissal motions throughout 1979 and during the actual trial-which began July 7, 1980-suc= cessfully whittled down Marwil's suit. Neither the Regents nor the three individual faculty members are now liable for damages, nor could they be ruled guilty of malice or violating Marwil's constitutional rights. Instead, the judge, if he decides in Marwil's favor, could order that a tenure review be performed. MARWIL AND HIS attorneys have indicated they were disturbed by the dismissal rulings, but claim they never considered dropping the suit because a court-ordered tenure review has been their primary aim. The complicated suit, reduced to its basic components, x lecision suggests on the one hand an outspoken professor per- . secuted by administrators who were ruffled by his4 frequent criticisms, while on the other hand; a group of department administrators sincerely concerned about the damage an abrasive faculty member could do in a close- R knit department, and earnestly pursuing every avenue to get rid of him. Marwil had reportedly clashed with a number of ^ humanities department colleagues over issues as seemingly minor as office space allocations to policies as important as hiring criteria. The former assistant 2 professor claims his direct opposition to department 2 chairman Mathes at department meetings in early 197" over hiring policies prompted Mathes, Loomis, and Steven- son to initiate rather unorthodox contract termination proceedings against him. MARWIL MAINTAINS THIS non-reappointment review was inappropriate because it was conducted during the first 2 year of a two-year contract. Reappointment reviews are normally conducted during the final year of a contract, See JUDGE, Page 13 m 4M$ THERE WERE some tense moments at the July meeting of the Regents and other University officials at Interlochen before the tuition hike was approved. Above, Vice-Presi- dents Henry Johnson and James Brinkerhoff, along with Regents Thomas Roach and Deane Baker contemplate the proposed 13 per cent increase. a , a L P tr0 Q 1Q', a ,,, JQ v e^ ^O °' J O Q. ° rr U Regents hike tuition"by 13%, salaries by 9% U,. -a I :.. i~n -+ b I r ~ (Continued from Page 1) probably not support as large a tuition increase next year. University President Harold Shapiro said if a tuition increase of less than 13 per cent were instituted, the University "would not fall apart. But we think that's the easy way out." Shapiro and other University executive officers told the Regents they doubted the University's high quality programs could be maintained without. a substantial increase in student sup- port for the University. UNIVERSITY OFFICIALS have vowed to mount a large-scale campaign for endowments and other donated fun- ds in order to make up for the smaller- than-necessary amount of support from the state. Butthe administrators say a drive for donated funds is a long-term effort, and the University needs funds immediately-hence the relatively large tuition hike. Michigan Student Assembly President Marc Breakstone said that attitude upsets him: "The thing I object to most is that students are bearing the greatest burden. It seems ironic that students are bearing the brunt of hard times but aren't being compensated proportionally in terms of quality of education. "It's just not fair that students are paying so much, and the money is going to some areas from which they do not benefit directly," he said. BREAKSTONE ALSO agreed with Dunn that the University should have attempted to decide which programs will lose money before deciding on how much tuition would have to go up to support the remaining services.. According to Vice-President for Academic Affairs Billy Frye, financial aid will be increased by about $875,000-an eight per cent increase over last year. "We expect to increase our financial aid allocation to ensure that no students will be denied the opportunity to attend the University of Michigan for lack of money," said Frye. However, according to Associate Tuition Rates Pe Academic 1980-81 Resident Non-resident Undergraduate - Lower Division .... 4ndergraduate - Upper Division .... Graduate ......... Dentistry .......... ... $ 682 (up $ 72) .. . 768 (up $ 86) ... 1054 (up $120) 1584 (up $180) .1172 (up $168) .. .1732 (up $198) . .. 612(up$ 68) $2060 (up $236) 2218 (up $254) 2308 (up $264) 3030 (up $346) 2518 (up $364) 3336 (up $382) 612 (up $ 68), Law ff dediclne1 Cpndidacy1 0 0 ..0 0 ________________________.m Ulrich's: the student calculator center We stock the complete lines in Hewlett-Packard, Texas Instruments, and Sharp calculators. Whether you need the most basic or the most sophisticated calculator, we have it. We understand what we sell, so we can assist you in selecting just what you need, We're competitive. In fact, we'll match any deal or refund your money Don't be disappointed. Come in and get your calculator early Director of Financial Aid James Zim- merman, the Office of Financial Aid only anticipated a 9.5 per cent tuition increse for the coming year when the final awards were calculated. He said the actual tuition hike of 13 per cent was so close to the office's estimate that it was unnecessary to revise awards. "The difference between our in-state tuition hike estimate and the final tuition increase was only $80 for the coming academic year," he explained. Zimmerman added that the office had not computed the difference for out-of- state students. The Daily estimated the difference for out-of-staters to be ap- proximately $140. The Regents incorporated the tuition and salary increases into a $246 million general fund budget-an increase of about $20.8 million over the 1979-80 fiscal budget. The general fund budget, as well as the total operating budget of $622.5 million, is based on a three per cent in- crease in the state appropriation tothy University. IN THE EVENT the state's ap propriation increase is less than three per cent, the following contingencies could be enacted, according to Frye: F " Temporary limiting or freezing exl penditures from central accounts; - " Replacing some general fund ek: penditures with funds from indiredt sources; and, " Enforcing a hiring/promotiop freeze of whatever magnitude and direction might be required to offset the problem. FRYE SAID FOR every one percen- tage point the state appropriation i4 crease falls below the three per cent: mark, the University will be about oe million dollars short. Shapiro stressed the importance s the nine per cent salary increas4~ saying the University pays less t$ faculty than some of its peer iq. stitutions.A The president also pointed out the necessity of cutting back some Univ4r