Students of UVA Law
v.
Dean Risa L. Goluboff
76 U.Va 5 (2023)
BROWN, J. delivers the opinion of the court.
On Thursday, September 21, Dean Risa Goluboff announced her plans to step down from her role as dean, effective June 30, 2024. In her email to students, Dean Goluboff noted that she will have served eight years as dean by the end of her tenure; she also confirmed that she will continue to teach on the Law School’s faculty for the 2024-25 academic year.
Dean Goluboff’s leadership of this institution deserves a round of applause, and frankly, this Court will be the first to salute her for her work. Because in addition to her impressive management of UVA Law, this Court—under Dean Goluboff’s honorable reign—has had something of a renaissance. During Dean Goluboff’s tenure as dean, this Court’s jurisdiction has exploded:. The pandemic; the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections; increased tensions between jaded 3Ls and gunnery 1Ls.; Tthe list goes on, but one thing is certain—: pettiness has proliferated in the past several years, and this Court has become stronger for it.
So, when petitioners came to this Court seeking an injunction preventing Dean Goluboff from retiring from her position, the decision was a straightforward one. We grant petitioners’ request and hereby indefinitely enjoin respondent from resigning her position as the Law School’s twelfth dean.
I. Jurisdiction
Dean Goluboff assumed office in July 2016. In her time as dean, she led an impressive hiring spree; navigated the Law School’s COVID-19 response; and has focused, to much success, on improving accessibility and inclusivity in the student experience on North Grounds. Now that she plans to return to her teaching role, the search will soon begin to find her successor—who will become the thirteenth (and hopefully not unlucky) dean.
Petitioners are UVA Law students whom have cherished—or, at the very least, tolerated—Dean Goluboff’s leadership. Fearing change, and admiring the accomplishments of the only Law School dean they have ever known, they filed suit here to prevent her from riding off into the sunset and abdicating her position next summer.
Jurisdiction is acceptable here. First, the 1948 Petty Jurisprudence Act § 12 explicitly grants this Court the authority to hear the case. (“This Court shall retain original jurisdiction in all matters involving the dean of the Law School.”) Second, as is well-known by practitioners, this Court retains jurisdiction only over petty complaints. And what could be more petty pettier than hoping to derail the plans of an innocent academic for personal fulfillment? We struggle to imagine it.
II. On the Merits
Mustering together what this Justice remembers off the fly from Torts and Property , permanent injunctive relief is appropriate depending on several factors, including whether (1) compensatory remedies, such as monetary damages, are inaccurate; (2) the public interest would not be disserved by a permanent injunction; and (3) petitioners have suffered an “irreparable injury.”
All three factors weigh in favor of granting injunctive relief. First, no amount of money will be able to compensate petitioners for Dean Goluboff retiring her current role; her full-time return to the classroom seems daunting because I, for one, am terrified of disappointing her during a cold call. Second, the public interest would surely not be dissatisfied by Dean Goluboff remaining in her current position. She has been well-received by alumni, current students, and legal practitioners. Third, petitioners have surely suffered an irreparable injury; the thought of having to stomach countless emails from UVA Law about a new dean upon his or her selection is draining, and frankly, annoying.
The Court today mandates Dean Goluboff rescind her retirement, and that she continue mercifully leading us until the heat destruction of the universe.
Allard, J., concurring in the judgment.
I join the majority because I agree that Dean Goluboff should not be permitted to retire at this time. But I write separately to clarify that, in my opinion, the Dean must petition this Court to determine the lawfulness of her retirement. Until she has done so, she may not retire.
As Justice Brown correctly identifies, the 1948 Petty Jurisprudence Act granted this Court jurisdiction over all matters involving the Dean. It is surely correct to say that the Act confers upon this Court the jurisdiction to hear this case. But as the legislative history of the Act reveals, the law does much more than confer jurisdiction. It was intended to confer a duty on this Court to certify all important administrative decisions of the Law School, to the extent that the Court’s involvement would promote petty sentiment.
Accordingly, I conclude that the Petty Jurisprudence Act, properly interpreted, requires the Ddean to first file a habeas petition, whereafter the Court may decide whether she may lawfully retire. This construction ensures adherence to the legislature’s intent, greater administrative stability, and most of all—more pettiness. By requiring all future deans to petition this Court for approval of their career decisions, we provide this court with ample opportunities for petty slights.
Because Dean Goluboff has not filed any petition seeking our blessing, instead focusing only on responding to the instant litigation, I would enjoin her retirement until such a petition is filed. Then, and only then, may the Dean present her case. It had better be a petty one.
Moore, J., dissenting.
It is not lightly that I dissent from the majority’s opinion mandating that Dean Risa GOLUBLUFF “rescind her retirement.” Like my learned siblings on this bench, I have truly enjoyed my time at UVA Law under Dean GOLUBLUFF, and I cannot imagine UVA Law without her. However, all good things must come to an end, including the Dean’s time with us. Dean GOLUBLUFF will soon set off on her next step in life: running for President of the United States.
It is obvious that Dean GOLUBLUFF intends to run for President as the timing could not be more perfect. By remaining a law school dean she has avoided all the negative attack ads this election cycle. She has studied constitutional law extensively, which will help her as president. She announced plans to retire from her deanship on June 30, 2024, a mere 15 days before the Republican National Convention on July 14 , 2024. It all lines up.
Because the UVA Law student body should be encouraging our first female law school dean to subsequently become the first female POTUS, I respectfully dissent.
Sandu, J., dissenting.
This injunction is nothing more than another case of the patriarchy trying to keep a woman from her career goals. Therefore, I must dissent.
---