## Facts

- Fabian Vaksman was enrolled in the University of Houston’s History Department Ph.D. program.
- By the time of the events at issue, Vaksman had completed substantial program requirements and was working toward completion of the doctorate.
- Vaksman was an active writer who published articles and a book expressing his political philosophy and views on political issues.
- Vaksman prepared a manuscript titled “The Problem of Ideological Motivation in the Making of Soviet Policy (1917–1984)” and provided it to the department’s graduate coordinator.
- Vaksman repeatedly voiced objections to department administration, including how departmental funds were used.
- Faculty members described Vaksman as difficult to deal with, including characterizing him as “unteachable” and a “thorn in the side” of department members.
- A department committee met in a closed session and decided to dismiss Vaksman from the Ph.D. program.
- Vaksman did not receive advance notice of the closed session and did not have an opportunity to speak before the dismissal decision.
- The department gave academic-sounding reasons for the dismissal, including that Vaksman needed to change his approach to history and could not be effectively supervised.
- The record submitted at trial did not show that Vaksman was having academic performance problems in the program.
- Vaksman sued the Board of Regents and various university administrators and faculty members, alleging violations of the Texas Constitution (free expression and due course of law) and also asserting federal constitutional claims under the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
- After a bench trial, the district court ruled for Vaksman, awarded actual damages and attorney’s fees, and ordered his reinstatement to the Ph.D. program.

## Issues

1. Whether the university’s dismissal decision was motivated by hostility to Vaksman’s protected expression and objections to department decisions, in violation of the Texas Constitution’s free-expression protections.
2. Whether dismissing Vaksman through a closed session without prior notice or an opportunity to be heard violated Texas due course of law (and related federal due-process protections pleaded in the case).
3. Whether the dismissal reflected a good-faith academic judgment or instead bad faith and ill will.
4. Whether university publications and policies created enforceable obligations governing dismissal standards or procedures, and whether those obligations were violated.

## Decision

- The district court entered judgment for Vaksman after a bench trial.
- The court found the dismissal violated Vaksman’s rights under the Texas Constitution, including freedom of expression and due course of law.
- The court found the dismissal was not made in good faith and was driven by bad faith and ill will rather than a legitimate academic assessment.
- The court ordered equitable relief requiring Vaksman’s reinstatement to the doctoral program.
- The court awarded Vaksman actual damages and attorney’s fees.

## Legal Principles

- A public university may not remove a student from an academic program as punishment for protected expression, including political speech and objections to university governance.
- Courts may give latitude to academic decision-making, but that deference does not protect actions shown to be taken in bad faith or for retaliatory, nonacademic reasons.
- When a public institution takes action that seriously affects a student’s academic status, deciding the matter in secret without notice or any chance to respond can violate Texas due course of law.
- Proven constitutional violations in the university setting may support equitable relief (such as reinstatement) and, where allowed, monetary relief and attorney’s fees.

## Conclusion

In this unreported 1991 Harris County district-court judgment, the court concluded that the University of Houston’s History Department dismissed Fabian Vaksman from its Ph.D. program through a closed, no-notice process and for improper reasons tied to his expression and objections, not for demonstrated academic failure; it therefore ordered reinstatement and awarded damages and attorney’s fees for violations of Texas free-expression and due-course protections.


Vaksman v. Board of Regents of the University of Houston, Dist. Ct. Harris County Texas 125th Jud. Dist. No. 88-50122 (1991)