Chapter 11:
Honor Code

Article 1. Introduction

Section 1. Preamble

We, Wake Forest University School of Law (hereinafter "School of Law") students and faculty (hereinafter “students” and “faculty,” respectively), adopt this Honor Code (hereinafter “Code”) as a statement of the minimum standards expected of students in their academic endeavors. In this Code, the faculty recognizes that students share with faculty and administration the responsibility and duty of promoting a climate of academic integrity in all academic endeavors. By sharing this commitment, we best promote the purpose of the Code. 

Section 2. Purpose

The School of Law is a community of scholars and learners, committed to the principles of honesty, trustworthiness, fairness, and respect for others. This commitment is particularly important given the mission of the School of Law to prepare its students for the duties of honesty and integrity that they will undertake as professionals. Students share with faculty and administration the responsibility of promoting a climate of academic integrity by practicing honesty, trustworthiness, fairness, and respect for others throughout their time as students and by upholding the standard of the Code. 

Section 3. Coverage

The Code applies to academic dishonesty of all students enrolled at the School of Law for all conduct specified and prohibited by Article III. 

Section 4. Publication

The School of Law will post the Code on its website in the Student Handbook. The orientation program for new students will inform these students of their obligations under the Code and require these students to sign a statement promising their commitment to upholding the principles of the Code. It is the responsibility of all students to read and familiarize themselves with the Code. Students are also independently bound by the Student Code of Conduct, which is outlined in Chapter 12 of the Student Handbook and administered by the faculty.

Section 5. Bar Admissions and Background Inquiries

All students should be aware that a record of academic dishonesty can be an extremely serious obstacle to a student’s gaining admission to the practice of law. A record of academic dishonesty also may hinder employment and clerkship opportunities.

Section 6. Definitions

a. Academic dishonesty: any conduct specified and prohibited by Art. III.

b. Academic endeavor: 

• • any work constituting a basis upon which a student will be evaluated to earn credit during the student’s time at the School of Law, 

  • any work performed in any School of Law sponsored academic activity in which the student competes against fellow students regardless of whether the student is seeking credit for such academic activity (such as a transactional, moot court, trial team, or journal competitions), 

  • any work performed in any academic activity in which the student participates on behalf of the School of Law regardless of whether the student is seeking credit for such academic activity, and 

  • any work performed to influence an academic record. 

Academic endeavors include, but are not limited to, in-class examinations; take home examinations; research papers (including topic proposals, outlines, and drafts); other writing assignments; oral presentations; class participation; externships; internships; practicums; work done in clinical programs, law journals, moot court, transactional competitions, and trial bar; and actions influencing the items listed in the definition of academic record.

c. Academic record: includes, but is not limited to, registration and add/drop forms, transcripts, materials submitted in connection with school-sponsored job interviews and school-sponsored competitions, attendance sheets, and correspondence or communication with the School of Law or University (hereinafter “University”) regarding academic matters. 

d. Academic day: any day in which classes are regularly scheduled, with the exception of summer school classes.

e. Attempt: attempted violations may be sanctioned in the same manner as completed violations; a student need not complete the intended act to be held accountable. 

f. Intentional: conduct that a student wants to perform, with a conscious object to cause a particular result prohibited by the Code. A student’s intent or lack thereof may be inferred from the circumstances.

g. Knowing: conduct performed when the student acts with subjective awareness that to a substantial degree of certainty the conduct would cause a particular result prohibited by the Code. A student’s knowledge or lack thereof may be inferred from the circumstances. A conscious effort to avoid knowledge about the attendant circumstances or results of conduct that is prohibited by the Code may qualify as knowing conduct.

h. Reckless: conduct that reflects a conscious disregard for a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the conduct could cause a particular result prohibited by the Code. A student’s recklessness or lack thereof may be inferred from the circumstances.

i. Negligent: conduct that a student performs despite circumstances that should lead a reasonable student to recognize a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the conduct could cause a particular result prohibited by the Code. A student’s negligence or lack thereof may be inferred from the circumstances.

j. Respondent: a student or students accused of a Code violation.

Article II. Scope and Jurisdiction

Section 1. Honor Council Original Jurisdiction

The Honor Council will have original jurisdiction to hear and to determine charges of academic dishonesty, as defined by Article III, by all students enrolled at the School of Law in any academic endeavor. If the jurisdiction of the Honor Council is contested or in doubt, the question of jurisdiction will be referred to a Preliminary Hearing Panel.

Section 2. Faculty Retention of Jurisdiction

The Dean and faculty retain jurisdiction over conduct covered by the Code only when, in the opinion of the Dean or faculty, the situation does not allow for timely disposition by the Honor Council and is necessary to avoid serious interference with the educational mission of the School of Law. Grading faculty retain the right to conduct their own academic inquiry and impose their own academic penalty regarding a matter referred to the Honor Council once the Honor Council has completed its Code obligations. Any such academic penalty must be consistent with the policies of the School of Law.

Article III. Prohibited Conduct

Section 1. Coverage

Academic dishonesty consists only of conduct, or attempt of such conduct, that violates any provision of Article III by any student. Ignorance of the Code is no excuse for a violation. Negligent conduct is not covered by the Code but may be subject to an academic penalty by the grading professor consistent with the policies of the School of Law and may also be subject to proceedings under the Student Code of Conduct.

Section 2. Lying

Lying consists only of making a false statement, which the student intends to be false, knows to be false, or which is made with reckless disregard for the truth of the matter asserted to gain advantage in an academic endeavor or to influence a Code proceeding. Lying to influence the outcome of a Code proceeding may result in a separate Code violation.

Section 3. Cheating

Cheating consists only of intentional, knowing, or reckless conduct. Cheating is limited to (1) using or attempting to use forbidden materials or violating the grading professor’s written instructions in an academic endeavor with the purpose or practical effect of obtaining an advantage over other students working on the same academic endeavor, (2) unsanctioned consultation or collaboration on any academic endeavor, and (3) discussion of an examination by a student who has taken the examination with, or in the close proximity of, a student who has not yet taken the examination.

Section 4. Plagiarism

Plagiarism consists only of intentional or knowing conduct. Plagiarism is limited to submitting as one’s own work the work of another with the intentional or knowing conduct to deceive. Intent or knowledge, or lack thereof, may be inferred based on the extent and context of improperly cited material and of the lack of attribution and whether the student has provided false citation or has manipulated the original text such a reasonable person may conclude that the student did so to avoid detection. Disregard for proper scholarly procedure that is minimal in scope may be addressed solely as an academic matter by the grading professor, and the grading professor may determine whether an academic penalty should be applied without pursuing resolution under the Code.

Section 5. Submitting Work for Multiple Purposes

Submitting work for multiple purposes consists only of intentional, knowing, or reckless conduct. Submitting work for multiple purposes is limited to submitting a student’s own work (in identical or similar form) in more than one academic endeavor without the prior and explicit approval of all faculty members to whom the work will be submitted. 

Section 6. Abuse of Library Privileges

Abuse of library privileges consists only of intentional, knowing, or reckless conduct involving materials from any School of Law or University library. Abuse of library privileges is limited to conduct that deprives or attempts to deprive other students of equal access to library materials to gain an advantage over other students. This includes, but is not limited to, the sequestering of library materials; the removal or attempt to remove library materials without authorization; and the defacing, theft, or destruction of library materials.

Section 7. Stealing

Stealing consists only of intentional or knowing conduct. Stealing is limited to taking or misappropriating the notes, papers, written work, books, computer, electronic notepad, or other similar academic materials of other students with the purpose or practical effect of obtaining an advantage over other students.

Section 8. Abuse of Shared Electronic Media

Abuse of shared electronic media consists only of intentional, knowing, or reckless conduct. Abuse of shared electronic media is limited to conduct that deprives other students of equal access to shared electronic media used for academic endeavors, including efforts that result in the damage or sabotage of campus computer systems, with the purpose or practical effect of obtaining an advantage over other students.

Section 9. Failure to Comply with an Affirmative Duty

Failure to comply with an affirmative duty consists only of intentional or knowing conduct. A failure to comply with an affirmative duty is limited to conduct that violates the affirmative duties recognized by Article IV, Sections 2, 3.

Article IV. Affirmative Duties

Section 1.

All members of the School of Law community share a responsibility to take appropriate action when academic dishonesty has occurred, including testifying and giving evidence when requested to do so under the Code. Students who have violated the Code are encouraged to report themselves. Self-reporting does not excuse academic dishonesty but may be considered in determining the appropriate sanction.

Section 2.

Any student who has firsthand knowledge of facts or events that raise a substantial question of whether academic dishonesty has occurred has the obligation to bring the matter to the attention of the Honor Council. Students with general knowledge of facts or events that they believe violate this Code are encouraged, but not required, to report.

Section 3.

Members of the Honor Council are under an obligation to keep all actions taken and all knowledge gained pursuant to the Code about students confidential and will only share any knowledge gained from their Honor Council membership when necessary to fulfill their obligations under the Code and only with their fellow Honor Council members, faculty, administrators, or, in the course of an investigation by Student Solicitors and Respondent’s Counsel, with other students. Student witnesses at a Charge Hearing are also under an obligation to keep all actions taken and all knowledge gained pursuant to the Code about students confidential.

Article V. Preliminary Hearing Procedures

Section 1. Referral to Student Solicitor

Upon receiving an allegation of academic dishonesty covered by the Code, the Chair of the Honor Council (hereinafter “Chair”) will refer the matter to one of the Student Solicitors (hereinafter “Solicitor”) for an investigation. The investigation will culminate with a written report by Solicitor with all facts and evidence discovered during the investigation and with Solicitor’s conclusions regarding the allegation. If after a full investigation, Solicitor, Chair, and Faculty Advisor to the Honor Council unanimously agree that a preliminary hearing is not warranted, the allegation will be dismissed.

Section 2. Notice of Preliminary Hearing to Respondent

Solicitor must notify Respondent within one academic day of the accusation. The notice will be in writing and will specify:

• the nature of the academic dishonesty alleged;

• the time and place of the alleged occurrence(s);

• the right to a preliminary hearing within eight academic days from the notice;

• the right to exercise the summer option (see infra Article V, Section 4), if applicable to the situation;  

• the right to be represented by a Respondent’s Counsel of the Honor Council (hereinafter “Counsel”), the right to be represented by another School of Law student of Respondent’s choice, or the right to self-representation; 

• the right to have the same rights of Counsel if Respondent chooses to have another School of Law student serve as Counsel or chooses self-representation; and

• details about contacting the School of Law Assistant Dean for Student Affairs for support and University resources for students to receive confidential mental health services.

Section 3. Timing of Preliminary Hearing

The Preliminary Hearing will be held within eight academic days from the notice to Respondent, unless Respondent exercises the summer option.

Section 4. Summer Option for Preliminary Hearing

If Respondent receives notice less than ten calendar days before the end of classes during the Spring term, or during the examination period for the Spring term, Respondent may elect to have the Preliminary Hearing held within fourteen calendar days after the end of the Spring examination period. To elect that option, Respondent must notify Solicitor within three calendar days of receipt of notice of Preliminary Hearing. If Respondent makes such an election, and, during the investigation period preceding the Preliminary Hearing, Solicitor reasonably believes that the election of the summer option will prejudice Respondent due to the lack of witnesses or evidentiary materials, Solicitor will so inform Respondent by written notice. Upon being so informed, Respondent may withdraw such election.

Section 5. Membership of Preliminary Hearing Panel

The Chair or Vice-Chair of the Honor Council (hereinafter “Vice-Chair”) and Secretary of the Honor Council and three faculty members selected by the Dean’s Office will typically comprise the Preliminary Hearing Panel (hereinafter “Panel”). Members of the Panel will be told the name of Respondent when the Preliminary Hearing is scheduled. If a Panel member knows of facts or circumstances that would compromise or reasonably appear to compromise the member’s impartiality in a particular case, the Panel member will be excused from participating in the Preliminary Hearing and charged to keep any information related to Respondent’s case confidential. If a member of the Honor Council is unable to attend the Preliminary Hearing, the Honor Council will appoint a replacement. If a faculty member is unable to attend a Preliminary Hearing, the Dean’s Office will appoint a replacement. The members of the Panel will select an Honor Council member to be the presiding member of the Panel, which will typically be the Chair or Vice-Chair.

Section 6. Virtual Attendance

Panel members who cannot attend the Preliminary Hearing in person for good cause may appear virtually by video or audio technology.

Section 7. Procedure at Preliminary Hearing

a. Beginning. The presiding member of the Preliminary Hearing will begin the hearing by reading the rights of Respondent at the Preliminary Hearing and binding all participants in the Preliminary Hearing to confidentiality as provided in Article IV, Section 3.

b. Solicitor. Solicitor will next present Solicitor’s written report and answer any questions posed by the Panel.

c. Counsel. Counsel will then present evidence in response to Solicitor’s written report and presentation. The Panel may then question Counsel and Respondent.

d. Conclusion. At the conclusion of the presentation of evidence and answering of questions, Solicitor, Counsel, and Respondent will be excused and the Panel will deliberate in private. 

Section 8. Decision of the Panel

The Panel will make its decision within twenty-four hours of the conclusion of the Preliminary Hearing. The allegation will be submitted to a Charge Hearing if the Panel makes the following three determinations by a preponderance of the evidence and by an affirmative vote of a majority of members, which must include at least one Honor Council member: 

(1) the allegation made against Respondent is within the jurisdiction of the Code, 

(2) the allegation has a reasonable basis in fact, and 

(3) the allegation warrants an appropriate Charge Hearing before the Honor Council. 

The presiding member of the Panel will notify Solicitor, Respondent, Counsel, and Chair of the decision within the same day of the Panel’s decision.

Section 9. Record of Preliminary Hearing Panel Proceedings

a. Recording. The Panel will make a video or audio recording of its proceedings beginning with the reading of Respondent’s rights and ending with the conclusion of the presentation of evidence and answering of questions. In the event that the Panel concludes that the allegation should be submitted to a Charge Hearing, the recording will be made available to Solicitor, Respondent, and Counsel upon written request.

b. Written Report. The Panel will make a written report of its findings, which will be made available to Solicitor, Respondent, and Counsel upon written request. 

c. Records. If the Panel decides that the allegation should not be submitted to a Charge Hearing, all attending records will be forwarded to the Dean’s Office for retention consistent with the retention policy for other student records and consistent with applicable student privacy rights.    

Article VI. Charge and Sanctioning Hearing Procedures

Section 1. Name and Purpose

If the Panel decides that the allegation should be submitted to a Charge Hearing, the Honor Council will conduct a Charge Hearing. The Honor Council may develop procedures for conducting the Charge Hearing that are not specifically provided in the Code yet are consistent with the Code.

Section 2. Timing, Notice, and Exchange of Witness Lists

a. Timing of Hearing. The Charge Hearing must be conducted within seven academic days of notice to the Chair under Art. V., Sec. 8 that a Charge Hearing is needed. The time of the Charge Hearing may be changed by a majority vote of the Honor Council members making up the Jury for good cause, provided that the Charge Hearing may not be rescheduled beyond the seven-day period without Respondent’s consent. 

b. Notice. At least five calendar days prior to the Charge Hearing, the Honor Council will give Respondent a written notice of:

• the particularized charges of academic dishonesty;

• the time and place of the Charge Hearing;

• the right to be represented by Counsel, the right to be represented by another Wake Forest Law student of Respondent’s choice, or the right to self-representation; 

• the right to have the same rights of Counsel if Respondent chooses to have another Wake Forest Law student serve as Counsel or chooses self-representation; and

• details about contacting Wake Forest Law’s Assistant Dean for Student Affairs for support and University resources for students to receive confidential mental health services.

c. Witness Lists. Solicitor and Counsel will exchange witness lists and so notify the Chair at least three calendar days prior to the Charge Hearing.

d. Stipulations. Solicitor and Counsel will agree on any stipulated facts, which can include a stipulation that Respondent pleads guilty to a charge, and so notify the Chair at least three calendar days prior to the Charge Hearing. Stipulations must be signed by Solicitor and Respondent.

Section 3. Private or Public Charge Hearing

a. Respondent’s Election of Public Hearing. The Charge Hearing will be closed to the public, unless Respondent elects in writing for a public hearing. Respondent's written election of a public hearing must be sent to the Chair no later than two calendar days after Respondent receives written notice of the Charge Hearing. 

b. Confidentiality. If Respondent elects a public hearing, no right to confidentiality exists. If Respondent does not elect a public hearing, the hearing will be private and confidential. All persons attending the Charge Hearing (whether as a witness or Honor Council member) will be bound by the confidentiality provisions of Article IV, Section 3.

Section 4. Membership and Voting Rights at the Charge Hearing

a. Nonvoting Attendance.  The Chair or Vice-Chair serves as Marshal of the Charge Hearing, and the Secretary will make a summary record of the Charge Hearing. Neither will have any voting rights at the Charge Hearing. Should neither the Chair nor Vice-Chair be able to attend a Charge Hearing as Marshal, the Jury will select a third-year member of the Honor Council to serve as Marshal.

b. Voting Attendance. The Charge Hearing will consist solely of six voting Honor Council members who will serve as Jury. Ordinarily, the Jury will be comprised of one member from the first-year class, two members from the second-year class, and three members from the third-year class. If Respondent is not a J.D. student, then the Jury will include a representative who shares Respondent’s student status and who will replace one of the six members who ordinarily serve, unless the circumstances make such selection unjust.

c. Selection of Jury. The Secretary will select the Jury no earlier than three calendar days before the Charge Hearing. Should any member of a Jury, upon hearing the charge and learning the identity of Respondent, conclude that they know of facts or circumstances that would compromise or reasonably appear to compromise their impartiality in a particular case, the Juror should so notify the Chair and be excused from the Jury, and the Secretary will select another Juror.

Section 5. Recording

The Secretary will make a video or audio recording of the Charge Hearing beginning with the Marshal’s reading of the rights of Respondent and ending when the Jury starts its deliberations. The recording will be available only to the Jury during its deliberations, to the Secretary in preparing the summary report, to the Dean for review of the sanction, to the faculty for any appeals process, and to Respondent if requesting an appeal. Except for those stated purposes, the recording will be kept strictly confidential, even if the hearing itself was public. The recording will become part of Respondent’s student record maintained by the Dean’s Office consistent with the retention policy for other student records and consistent with applicable student privacy rights.

Section 6. Marshal's Duties at Charge Hearing

The Marshal will begin the Charge Hearing by reading the rights of Respondent at the Charge Hearing and binding all participants in the Charge Hearing to confidentiality as provided in Article IV, Section 3. The Marshal will ask Respondent if any charge will be admitted, in which case a plea of guilty will be entered, or if a charge will be denied, in which case a plea of not guilty will be entered. The Marshal will rule on admissibility of proffered evidence. The Marshal will remind Respondent and all student witnesses that they are honor bound to tell the truth during the Charge Hearing under Article III, Section 2. Any witness who is not bound by the Code will be sworn in before testifying with an appropriate affirmation.

Section 7. Solicitor's Case

After the Marshal has begun the Charge Hearing, Solicitor will present the case against Respondent by reading all charges to the Jury and presenting evidence in support of the charges, including any stipulations of fact. The Jury and Counsel will have the right to ask questions of any witness presented by Solicitor until they are satisfied that the witnesses can furnish no additional relevant information. If the stipulations of fact resolve all factual issues regarding the charges, then Solicitor’s case will consist solely of presenting the stipulations of fact.

Section 8. Respondent's Defense

At the conclusion of Solicitor’s case, Counsel may present evidence in defense to the charges. The Jury and Solicitor will have the right to ask questions of any witness presented by Counsel until they are satisfied that the witnesses can furnish no additional relevant information.

Section 9. Closing Arguments

At the conclusion of Counsel’s case, Solicitor will give a closing argument, followed by a closing argument by Counsel.

Section 10. Instructions to Jury

After closing arguments, the Marshal will instruct the Jury on all charges and the matters to be considered during the deliberation over the guilt of Respondent. The Marshal will also give the Jury a document, for use by the Dean’s Office, listing the particularized findings of fact at issue and seeking the Jury’s decision on each fact. The Marshal will also instruct the Jury that members must find Respondent guilty beyond a reasonable doubt to cast a vote of guilt and must only consider the evidence presented at the Charge Hearing.

Section 11. Jury Deliberations

The Jury will deliberate in private. A decision of guilt requires at least five votes of guilt. An abstaining vote is a not guilty vote. Without five votes of guilt, Respondent will be acquitted. After reaching its decision, the Jury will inform the Marshal who will then share that decision only with Solicitor, Respondent, and Counsel. The Marshal will then remind all present of their duties of confidentiality under Article IV, Section 3.

Section 12. Sanction Hearing

If the Jury finds Respondent guilty or Respondent pleads guilty, the Marshal will reconvene the Jury either immediately thereafter or the following day in private, whether the Charge Hearing is private or public, so that both Solicitor and Counsel may present arguments related to the sanction to be imposed.

a. Proceedings. The rules for the Charge Hearing will all apply to the Sanction Hearing, with the following specifications: Solicitor will first present facts, evidence, and arguments as to the sanctions being sought, followed by Counsel who may present facts, evidence, and arguments as to an appropriate sanction.  

b. Jury Deliberations. At the conclusion of the arguments, the Marshal will refer the Jury to the sanctions allowed under the Code and adjourn the Jury to deliberate in private. The Jury will promptly conduct its deliberations in private. In reaching a decision on sanctions, the Jury will be guided by the intent of the Code to foster a culture of academic integrity among the student body and by the nature and gravity of the offenses. Recommendations of a particular sanction require at least four members of the Jury voting in favor of the sanction. A Jury must recommend at least one sanction. If a Jury is unable to agree upon any particular sanction, then the Dean will determine the sanction.  If a decision as to a particular sanction is reached, the Jury will inform the Marshal, who will share that decision only with Solicitor, Respondent, and Counsel. The Marshal will then remind all present of their duties of confidentiality under Article IV, Section 3.

Section 13. Referral to the Dean

All findings on guilt and recommended sanctions, if any, will be expeditiously reported to the Dean. All attending records for the Charge Hearing and, if applicable, Sanction Hearing will be given to the Dean’s Office for retention consistent with the retention policy for other student records and consistent with applicable student privacy rights.

Section 14. Appeals Procedure

A Respondent found guilty may appeal a Jury’s decision of guilt to the full-time residential faculty by giving written notice to the Dean within three calendar days of the Jury’s sanction decision. The evidentiary record and the recording of the Charge Hearing will be provided to the full-time residential faculty for its use during the appeal. The full-time residential faculty will establish the procedure of the appeal and the rights of Respondent. Such procedures and rights will be consistent with the Code. The decision of the full-time residential faculty concerning an appeal will be made within fourteen calendar days of the appeal and will be final.

Section 15. Final Disposition

After the conclusion of any appeal, the Dean, considering the relevant record and the outcome of any appeal on guilt, will either approve or alter the sanction recommended by the Jury. The Dean may delegate the final decision with respect to a sanction by seeking the full-time residential faculty’s recommendation and adopting the faculty recommendation as to the sanction. The Dean will have the responsibility of imposition and supervising the imposition of sanction.

Section 16. Sanctions

Sanctions for academic dishonesty must be selected from the ones identified in this section. More than one of the below sanctions may be imposed when deemed appropriate.

a. Notice: A written warning from the Dean that continuation of conduct in violation of the Code may be cause for more severe disciplinary sanctions.

b. Reprimand: A permanent letter of reprimand from the Dean to be placed in Respondent’s law school file maintained by the Dean’s Office.

c. Probation: Exclusion from participation in all or certain privileged or extracurricular law school activities. 

d. Restitution: Reimbursement for defacement, damage to, or misappropriation of property.

e. Suspension: Suspension from the School of Law for a definite period (e.g., one semester, one year, or two years) with or without conditions of readmission stated in the suspension notice. Suspension also may be given for an indefinite period, provided that the conditions of readmission will be stated in the suspension notice. 

f. Expulsion: Expulsion from the School of Law.

Article VII. Organization of Honor Council

Section 1. Membership

The membership and election of the Honor Council is limited to eleven third-year students, eight second-year students, five first-year students, one LLM/SJD student, and one MSL student. Students selected for the Honor Council serve as members until they graduate, withdraw from the School of Law, or voluntarily resign. Members who withdraw from the School of Law or voluntarily resign their seat will be replaced by a student of the same class appointed by the Chair until the next regularly scheduled student election. Members may also be removed from the Honor Council upon a vote of three-quarters of the class which elected the member or upon being found guilty of violating the Code or Student Code of Conduct. Members removed from their seat will be replaced by a student of the same class appointed by the Chair until the next regularly scheduled student election.

Section 2. Election

Honor Council members will be elected by majority vote of the student body in the Spring at the same time as new officers for the Student Bar Association are elected. Members of the Honor Council from the first-year, LLM/SJD, and MSL class will be elected when their first SBA representatives are elected in the Fall.

Section 3. Election of Officers

At the first meeting after the election of new members in the Spring, but before the end of the school year, the Honor Council will elect one of its members to serve as Chair for the next academic year. At the same meeting, the Honor Council will elect one of its members to serve in each of the following roles for the next academic year: Vice-Chair, Secretary, Educator, and Treasurer.

Section 4. Roles of Officers

a. Chair: Orders investigations; presides over all Honor Council meetings, proceedings, and hearings; conveys findings and recommendations of the Honor Council to the Dean; and oversees election and interview procedures.

b. Vice-Chair: Fulfills the Chair’s duties whenever the Chair is unavailable and assists the Chair as needed.

c. Secretary: Serves on the Preliminary Hearing Panel; makes a summary record of Preliminary Hearings, Charge Hearings, and Sanction Hearings; appoints Jury members to serve prior to Charge and Sanction Hearings; records Hearings; and takes notes of Honor Council meetings.

d. Educator: Establishes procedures to increase the awareness of the Code throughout the student body, including JD, LLM, SJD, MSL, and any other School of Law students. The Educator fulfills the Secretary’s duties with regards to Hearings if the Secretary is unavailable.

e. Treasurer: Manages the budget and acquires funds as needed.

Section 5. Election of Solicitors and Counsels

When the student body elects members of the Honor Council in the Spring semester, the student body will also elect two students to serve as Solicitors and two students to serve as Counsels for the next academic year. Solicitors and Counsels will serve for a term of one year and may run for re-election. Solicitors and Counsels will have equal authority, although only one will handle each case. Counsels will serve as advisors and representatives to any Respondent if Respondent requests the assistance of Counsel.

Section 6. Jury Selection

The Secretary will designate the members of the Honor Council to serve on a particular Jury. To assure fairness to Respondent and to equalize the burden of members of the Honor Council, the Secretary will maintain a rotating schedule by which the Secretary makes Jury assignments.

Article VIII. Amendments

The Code may be amended by a vote of three-quarters of the votes cast by the student body of Wake Forest Law and upon approval by the faculty. The faculty retains its inherent power to revoke this Code.  

Adoption Date: April 2020.