# FILED
June 18, 1997 Cecil W. Crowson Ap pellate Cou rt Clerk 

### IN THE COUR T OF A PPEA LS OF TENN ESSEE MIDDLE SECTION AT NASHVILLE

NICO EMILE FLOWERS, by next ) friend and Natural Parent, ) Tracey Ly nn Bastian, ) ) Plaintiff/Appellee, ) Appeal No. ) 01-A-01-9705- CH-00219 VS. ) ) Davidson Chancery METROPOLITAN BAPTIST ) No. 97-1551-I SCHOOLS, ) ) Defendant/Appellant. )

APPEALE D FRO M THE C HANC ERY C OURT O F DAVI DSON COUN TY

AT NASHVILLE, TENN ESSEE THE HONORABLE IRVIN H. K ILCREASE, JR ., CHANCEL LOR

FOR APPELLEE: FOR AP PELLAN T: Paul Juliu s W alwyn Kevin H. Theriot P. O. Box 6293 101 Westpark Drive, Sui te 250 Madison, TN 37115 Brentwood, TN 37020



### REVERSED A ND REMA NDED

BEN H. CAN TRELL, JUDGE CONCUR: TODD, P.J., M .S. KOCH, J.1 Pursuant t o Ten n. R. App. P. 2 , we suspend th e appl icat ion ofTenn. R. App. P. 24- 26, & 29. W e also fi nd oral argument to be unnecessary pursuantto Tenn. R. App. P. 35(c)

. 2 Tenn. Ct. App. R. 10(b) pr ovi des:

The Co urt, wit h the concu rrence ofall ju dg es pa rtic ipa ting in the case, m ay affirm, rever se or modify the acti ons of t he tr ial court by m em ora ndum opini on when a for mal opini on would have n o precedent ial value
. W hen a case i s decide d by memorandum opini on, it shall be designated “ME MO RAN DU M O PINIO N,” s hall not be publi shed, an d s ha ll no t be cite d o r re lied on for an y r eason i n a subsequent u nrel ated case. 2



### Memorandum Opinion

This extraordi nary appeal arises out of an or der enjoininga privat e school from expelli ng one of itsstudents accus ed of smoking marijuana. We first find that this is an appropriate ca se for an extraordinaryappeal pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 10. Since the school’s application an d the student’s answer fully set fort h th e parties’ positions and the material f acts, we dispense with furt her brie fing and oral argumentand proceed to themerits of the appeal in order to save t he pa rties additional time and expens e. 1 Because court s should not i nterfere in the internal affairs of pr ivate, vol untary org anizations unless there is a show ing that the organization’s procedures have not been f ollowed or that the org anizatio n has otherwise acted in an ar bitrary , oppressive or unlaw ful manner, we h ave determined that the trial court’s order enjoining the school from ex pelling th e student until afterthe conclusion of the fi nal exami n ations should bereverse d and the case re manded to the trial court for further proce edings in accordance with Tenn. Ct. App. R. 10(b ). 2

I. During the 1996-97 academ ic year, Nico Flowers was a sophomore at Metropolitan Baptist Schools (“Metropolitan”), a private educatio nal in stitution operated by t he Metropoli tan Baptist Church in Madis on. The rules and regulations contained in the school ’s student handbook mandate expuls ion ofany student u sing drugs. The school’s re-enroll ment form, sign ed by Mr. Flowers’ legal guardians,3

provides: ”The teachers an d administrati on are hereby given ful l di scret ion in the discipline of our child or children, this would include . . . expulsi on from the school.”

On May 2, 19 97, two stud ents at Metrop olitan told th e school administrator, Grant Endicot t, thatMr. Flowers had admitted s moking marij uana prior to attending the school’s April 11, 1997 springconcert. Two addition al students later confirmed the admission. Three ofthese students stated that they also observed Mr. Fl owers acting “funny” and that t hey smelled marijuana on his breath and clot hes
. W hil e denying that he actually smoked marijuana , Mr. Flowers admit ted to Mr
. Endicott that he told the other students thathe had done so. Based on these f acts, Mr. Endicott deter mined that Mr. Flowers had violated the school’s policy prohibiting the use of drugs and expelled him.

On May 8, 1997, Mr. Flowers f ile d a complaint for t emporary and permanentinjun ctive relie f in t he Ch ance ry Cour t fo r David son C oun ty. On May 19, 1997, the trial court enjoin ed Metropoli tan from preventingMr. Flowers from attending school until after the conc lusion of the fina l examinations for the current sem ester. Thereafter, the ex pulsion would be reinst ated.

On May 16, 1997 , Metropoli tan filed a Tenn. R. App. P. 10 application foran extraordi nary appeal seeking review of the injuncti on. Metropol itan also soug ht a stay of the or

der pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 7. On May 21, 1997, this court ordered Mr. Flower

s to file an answer

to the application. Metropolitan sub sequently supplemented its application with cer tified copies of the trial cour t’s order an d, on May 23, 1997, this cour

t stayed enforcement of the trial co urt’s inj unction pending disposit ion of the Tenn. R. App. P. 10 applicatio n. Mr. Fl owers has now filed an answer to the applicatio n.

II
.4 The sole issue in this appeal is w hether the tri al court proper ly enjoi ned the expulsi on of Mr. Flowers pursuant t o Tenn. R. Civ . P. 65.04.

Tenn. R. Civ . P. 65.04(2) p rovides: A temporary injunction may be granted dur ing the pendency of a n acti on if it

is cl early

show n by verifie d comp laint , affidavit or other

evidence that the movant’s rights are being or will be violated by an adve rse party and the mov ant will sufferimmediate a nd irrepara ble inju ry, loss or da mage pending a final judgment in the action, or

that the acts or omissions of the adverse party w ill tend to r ender such final judgment ineff ectual.

Havi ng revi ewed the record, we conclude that Mr . Flower s has not shown that any of his rights h ave been or w ill be v iolate d by hi s exp ulsion. Attendance at a privat e, religi ous educational institution is a priv ilege, not a right. See, Tenn. Secondary Sch. Athletic As s’n v. Cox

, 425 S.W.2d 59 7, 602 ( Te nn. 1968). Moreover, the school has not bre ac hed any explicit contractual obligation to Mr. Flowers
. Metropolitan’s rules, agreed to by Mr. Flower s’ legal guardians when he enrolled, leave dis ciplinary and expulsi on decisions t o the sole dis cretion of the school administrati on. Wh ile Mr. Flowers admits that his contrac

t with Metropolit an granted the school w ide discret ion in disci plining hi m, he a sserts tha t an injunction is appropriateunde r Ten n. R. Civ. P. 65.04 because of the oppressive and arbitrar y way in which the school exercised it s discretion. Thus the only issue to be decide d is whether the court may

review the discretionary decision of the school’s adm inistrator.
The courts will generally not interfere with the internal affairs of private, voluntaryassociations. Original Lawr ence County Far

m Organi

zati on, Inc. v. Tenn. Far m Bureau Federati

on , 907 S.W.2d 419, 421 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1995 ); Mora n v . Vincent , 588 S.W.2d 86 7, 870 (Tenn. Ct. App. 19 79). Courts may intervene only where the associati on’s procedures have not been followed o r

where the association5

oth erwise acts in an ar bitrary , oppressive or unlaw ful manner. Coke v. Uni ted Transportati

on Union , 552 S.W .2d 402, 405 (Tenn . Ct. App. 1977).

We cann ot sa y that the s choo l’s de cisio n to e xp el Mr. Flowers was arbi trary, oppressive or unlawful. Metropolitan’s decision was b as ed on the accusationsof four students who stated t hat Mr . Flowers to ld them he had s moked marijuanaon a number ofoccasions. Three of the se students obser ved actions

by Mr. Flower

s consistent

with marijuana use a nd also smelled marijuana on hi s breath and clothing. In light of th ese facts and the broa d discretion granted the school’s administrati on in thestuden t handbo ok and e nroll ment for m, the court finds no basis on which t o second guess the school’s

decision.

III. M etropolitan’s Tenn. R. App. P. 10 app lication for an extraord inary appeal is grant ed
. The decision of the trial court enjoining the expulsion of Mr. Flowers is re versed and t he case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. The costs of this a ppeal are taxed to the appellee for which execution may issue.

_________ ______________

___________ BEN H. CAN TRELL, JUDGE CONCUR:

_______________________________ HENRY F . TODD, PRESID ING JUDGE MIDDLE SEC TION

_______________________________ WILLIAM C. KOCH, JR., J UDGE