The student met with the chairman of the biochem. department, who was also the chief lecturer for the course, and alleged that he must have made a transposition error in filling in his answers on the answer sheets for one of the three exams. The department chairman then met with another faculty member and after inspecting the student's exam booklet and answer sheet, concluded that the student had failed.

The students initiated a grade appeal whereupon it was discovered that some of his answer sheets and examination booklets were missing. In seeking to have the "F" grade removed from his transcript, he alleged that he was entitled to inspect his educational record and the University was obligated to produce all materials used in determining his grade and that failing to produce all of his answer sheets and exam booklets prohibited him from successfully appealing his grade or challenging the educational records, thus depriving him of his due process rights.

Issue: In the absence of bad faith, malice, or fraud, must a failing grade be expunged from a student's record because some of the exam papers of the student have been lost, misplaced, or destroyed, where there is other evidence of the accuracy and validity of the failing grade?

Answer: No

Reasoning of the Court: The Court first noted that the Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act and regulations thereunder, together with the bylaws of the University of Nebraska and the grade appeals procedure of the University of Nebraska Medical Center, grant to a student the right to inspect and review his educational records, and prohibit the destruction of records when there is an outstanding request to inspect and review them.

In ruling against the student, the Court reasoned that the original documents are not the only admissible evidence of the contents of the documents. It declared that secondary evidence of the contents of a writing is generally admissible where it is shown that the original writing has been lost or destroyed. The Court concluded that there was simply no evidence of bad faith, malice, or fraud on the part of the University and the secondary evidence of the missing documents was given by witnesses under oath and subject to the rigors of cross-examination, and it was more than sufficient to establish the accuracy and validity of the grading of the missing documents.