## Facts

- Dr. Boris S. Browzin was hired in 1962 as a professor in Catholic University’s School of Engineering and Architecture and later obtained tenure; his primary fields were Structures and Soil Mechanics.
- By 1969, the School faced severe budget reductions and undertook retrenchment and reorganization, including reductions of both non-tenured and some tenured faculty.
- On November 11, 1969, the Dean notified Browzin that, after review of programs under new budget limitations, the University would discontinue certain areas, including Soil Mechanics and Hydrology.
- The Dean stated the decision was based on financial considerations and set an effective termination date of January 31, 1971, providing roughly 14 months’ notice.
- Browzin sued for breach of contract, claiming tenure protections barred termination.
- Before trial, the parties stipulated that Browzin was highly qualified, held tenure, and the University faced a bona fide financial exigency at the time of termination.

## Issues

1. Whether terminating a tenured professor due to bona fide financial exigency and program discontinuance breached the employment contract governing tenure.
2. What level of judicial review applies to a private university’s academic and fiscal judgments in selecting programs and positions for elimination.
3. Whether the University complied with contractually incorporated policies or procedures applicable to layoffs of tenured faculty during financial exigency.

## Decision

- The court affirmed judgment for Catholic University.
- Given the stipulated bona fide financial exigency, the court treated the central question as whether the University’s response breached contractual tenure protections.
- The court declined to substitute judicial judgment for the University’s academic and resource-allocation determinations where the decision reflected academic and financial judgment rather than arbitrary or bad-faith action.
- The court relied in part on evidence of a deliberative reorganization process and extended advance notice of termination.

## Legal Principles

- Tenure at a private university is principally contractual; the scope of protection depends on the contract and incorporated policies.
- Tenure does not necessarily guarantee continued employment when a bona fide financial exigency requires program reductions or discontinuance, if such conditions are recognized by the governing contractual framework.
- Courts generally defer to a university’s good-faith academic and fiscal judgments about program priorities and staffing during financial retrenchment, absent proof of bad faith, arbitrariness, discrimination, or material departure from required procedures.
- A stipulated or otherwise established financial exigency narrows judicial inquiry to whether the institution acted within the bounds of the contract and applicable procedures.

## Conclusion

The D.C. Circuit upheld the termination of a tenured professor during a stipulated financial exigency, holding that contractual tenure protections did not bar a good-faith, program-based layoff decision and that courts should not reweigh a university’s academic and fiscal judgments absent evidence of improper conduct or contractual noncompliance.


Browzin v. Cath. Univ. of Am., 527 F.2d 843 (D.C. Cir. 1975)