Former South Carolina State University President Dr. Andrew Hugine is suing the university and many of its trustees, claiming there was a conspiracy to oust him and tarnish his name.

In his multimillion-dollar lawsuit, Hugine claims trustees worked out his removal before the issue reached the full board for a vote. He claims that members of the group, including Board Chairman Maurice Washington, then falsely accused him of misconduct to justify his removal.

"The career and reputation of Andrew Hugine Jr., a man who dedicated more than thirty years of his life to the university, has been destroyed. We look forward to his vindication in the months ahead through the judicial process," said Benjamin M. Mabry, Hugine's attorney.

A release from S.C. State's attorney, Charles Boykin, said, "We have not been served with Dr. Hugine's suit and will therefore not address the allegations mentioned in this press release.

"The university and the board of trustees acknowledge that individuals in today's society tend to sue for anything. It is puzzling that Dr. Hugine is willing to join the litigation crowd. Be that as it may, the university will vigorously defend against these allegations brought by Dr. Hugine."

Hugine was in his second year of a five-year contract on Dec. 11, 2007 when trustees voted 7-3 to remove him, according the lawsuit. While the university has said it did not renew Hugine's contract, he said he was terminated.

In the lawsuit, filed Wednesday in Orangeburg, Hugine is seeking actual damages of no more than $1 million from the university for allegedly breaching his contract. He's also seeking $2 million in actual and punitive damages from the other defendants, including Washington, Board Chairman-elect Lumus Byrd, and trustees Martha Smith, Earl Bridges, Shirley Martin and Reggie Gallant. S.C. State Faculty Senate President Dr. Evelyn Fields and former trustee Schylver Foster are also named as defendants.

The evaluation

The lawsuit claims, "defendants met, schemed, planned and conspired and put together an agenda to unlawfully construct a false and illegal evaluation in order to ... cause the termination of the plaitiff (Hugine)."

Hugine scored a 2.84 on a five-point scale on his annual evaluation in 2007. Trustees said the university was not raising enough money, lacked a complete safety plan and failed to focus on academics properly under Hugine's administration.

The lawsuit claims Hugine was unfairly evaluated on objectives he wasn't told about beforehand. It also says the final evaluation was never approved publicly by trustees as it should have been.

No decision or vote was taken on the evaluation when the board emerged from a June 2007 executive session to discuss it, which the lawsuit claims renders it legally useless.

Hugine says the board violated its own by-laws by having seven members on the presidential evaluation committee. The board's by-laws state that the committee shall "consist of not less than three (trustees) or more than six."

Additionally, the committee "brazenly ignored and violated" requirements that it notify the state and media of its meetings, according to the lawsuit.

The teleconference

The lawsuit claims the decision to remove Hugine as president came before the actual vote was made during a teleconference.

Hugine said he was handed his termination letter immediately following the teleconference meeting and a press release announcing the board's decision was sent out shortly after as well.

The lawsuit claims the swiftness of those actions shows an "illegal polling" of the board occurred prior to the meeting.

The lawsuit claims the board violated its own by-laws by not providing a written notice to all trustees five working days ahead of the teleconference. Trustees were notified only a day prior to the meeting, making any vote taken at the meeting illegal, the lawsuit says.

The motion to oust Hugine was made by Byrd, who cited Hugine's performance on the board's annual evaluation and an audit conducted by the Education Commission of the States on the university's academic programs.

A press release issued by the ECOS on Dec. 14, 2007, said the audit never commented on the effectiveness of the university's leadership, nor did it make any negative comments regarding Hugine.

Defamation claimed

The lawsuit also claims Washington made a presentation to the Columbia chapter of the South Carolina State University National Alumni Association in April in which he made several derogatory assertions regarding Hugine's presidency.

At the meeting, he labeled Hugine as responsible for allowing a murderous felon to work at S.C. State, letting an embedded State Law Enforcement Division agent enroll at the university, losing or misusing hundreds of thousands dollars annually and improperly diverting ticket, concession and book sales, the lawsuit claims.

Hugine said those allegations were either false or not under his purview.

The lawsuit also refers to comments made by Washington to The Times and Democrat for an article published on Dec. 23, 2007, entitled "The Chairman Strikes Back."

Washington told The T&D then that the board lost confidence in Hugine because of the fallout from last August's housing crunch that left many incoming students without a place to live.

The lawsuit, however, claims the housing crunch was Washington's fault because he ordered the director of the S.C. State marching band to add 100 band students without Hugine's knowledge. Hugine said all of those students came to campus expecting housing and some were not even admitted to S.C. State at the time.

"Because these students needed to attend band camp, they were placed in the residence hall by SCSU's administration in an attempt to minimize any embarrassment to SCSU," the lawsuit says.

In the same article, Washington said Hugine "deliberately mismanaged" the first ECOS audit to hide deficiencies, which the lawsuit calls a complete falsehood.

The lawsuit also claims Fields cast Hugine as a poor administrator "engaged in shady and unethical conduct" in order to garner faculty support for his dismissal. The lawsuit alleges Fields' campaign was supported by Washington.

The lawsuit alleges "Defendant Fields' role in said matter was motivated by her non-appointment to the position of Chair of the Department of Education, a position to which she was immediately named upon the appointment of Dr. Leonard McIntyre as interim president."

Fields said she was unaware of the lawsuit and had no comment. Calls to Washington, Byrd, Mabry and Hugine were not immediately returned.

This is the second multimillion lawsuit to be filed against university officials in less than a week.

A former supervisor of grounds and maintenance at S.C. State filed a $3 million lawsuit last week against three university officials and two contractors, alleging those individuals and companies conspired to fire him because he reported improprieties.

T&D Staff Writer Lee Tant can be reached by e-mail at ltant@times anddemocrat.com or by phone at 803-534-1060.

You must be logged in to comment.