Ex-NFL end sues Navy (79513)

A former Naval Academy football star who went on to play for parts of three seasons in the NFL is suing the Navy to avoid repaying his academy tuition, claiming other midshipmen who dishonored the Annapolis institution had their tuition waived after resigning.

Kevin J. Hickman, taken in the sixth round of the 1995 draft by the Detroit Lions, resigned from the academy in 1995 — after exhausting his football eligibility — when it became clear that he would be expelled, he said in court documents filed in the U.S. district court in Baltimore last week.

“It is manifestly unfair that I should be treated less favorably than those other ex-midshipmen, when my misconduct was far less deplorable than what they did, thereby, unlike them, bringing far less, if any, discredit on the Naval Academy or the Naval Service,” Hickman wrote in his application asking the Navy to waive recoupment of $73,353 in tuition. He noted that neither the 24 midshipmen expelled as a result of a 1992 cheating scandal nor a midshipman expelled in 1996 for using illegal drugs were required to reimburse the Navy for their educations.

Hickman, who now serves as athletic director at Bishop Gorman High School in Las Vegas, said in court documents that he was about to go before an academic board for the sixth time in December 1994 when he decided to resign from the academy. The record-setting tight end had already been told that he was “running out of chances” — he had served 100 days of restriction for conduct violations, had “run afoul” of the swim-test requirements and was on pace to graduate at least six months late.

The Board for Correction of Naval Records agreed to waive tuition reimbursement in a 2-1 decision issued in April. The majority noted that Hickman “was not processed for separation [from the Navy] until after he had completed his four year football eligibility and speculated that compromises may have been made to retain him through the first semester of his senior year.”

“[I]n weighing the facts if this case against those cases where reimbursement was waived for individuals discharged from [the Naval Academy] because of misconduct, the majority believes that directing reimbursement in this unique case was inappropriate.”

One month later, however, the board sent Hickman a letter informing him that “the designated representative of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Manpower and Reserve Affairs” had reviewed the case and reversed the board’s decision.

In response, Hickman filed suit last week against the Secretary of the Navy, charging that the Navy’s actions were arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion.

His complaint alleges that there was “an unlawful delegation of authority” to an unidentified “designated representative” of an assistant secretary.

The Secretary of the Navy can delegate responsibilities to an assistant secretary — both presidential appointees — explained William M. Ferris, Hickman’s lawyer. The assistant secretary, however, cannot delegate authority to a designee not appointed by the president.

In addition, Ferris said, there was no assistant secretary of the Navy for manpower and reserve affairs between the board’s decision on April 11 and the rejection of that decision on May 18.

Ferris, who has been handling these kinds of cases for 20 years, said it was unusual for the Navy to overrule a board decision. “It’s only something that’s happened to me in recent years.”

In the last case he handled in which the board was reversed, involving a homosexual midshipman, the Navy changed its mind about seeking reimbursement before filing an answer to his client’s complaint.

“I wouldn’t be surprised to see that happen in this case,” Ferris said.