Opinion ID: 2551099
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: UAF Termination Proceedings Against Sengupta (Rice Hearing)

Text: On September 1, 1994, UAF initiated termination proceedings against Sengupta based on the findings of Hearing Officer Parrish. [3] Sengupta requested and was granted a pre-termination hearing. Sengupta also filed a grievance against UAF, asserting that the termination was improper retaliation for his earlier grievances in violation of a UAF regulation prohibiting retaliation. [4] The university chancellor determined that the retaliation claim should be decided in the pending pre-termination hearing, rather than in a separate grievance proceeding. [5] The pre-termination hearing was held on December 12, 1994 before Hearing Officer Julian Rice. [6] Sengupta appeared pro se at this hearing. Rice issued a decision on January 17, 1995, in which he recommended that Sengupta be terminated for cause. Rice afforded collateral estoppel to the Parrish findings and concluded that the University is not obligated to relitigate all of the issues covered at length in the previous grievance proceeding. Rice made a number of findings similar to those made by Hearing Officer Parrish. On January 19, 1995, the university chancellor wrote Sengupta to inform him that she had accepted Rice's recommendations and that Sengupta would be discharged for cause. The chancellor informed Sengupta that he could appeal the decision to the university president and then pursue judicial review if he wished. Sengupta appealed to the university president and his appeal was rejected. [7]