Harvard's administrative board provides students with few of the legal protections provided by courts, such as the right to cross examine accusers and to be represented by counsel. But while many call the system unjust, its standards have proven difficult to challenge in court.

Aside from the lawsuit brought against the University last month by two students seeking their diplomas, four attorneys who have been involved with administrative board cases say they are aware of only one other challenge to make it to trial in recent years.

Even that case--a 1997 challenge--ended in a settlement between the two parties after a week of trial testimony.

"There have been cases before, [but] they have generally been settled," says Harvey A. Silverglate, who represents one of the plaintiffs in the current lawsuit.

Lawyers familiar with College disciplinary proceedings say challenges to the system are few and far between because courts are reluctant to intervene in University matters.

"In ordinary circumstances, courts are extremely reluctant to overturn a disciplinary decision from a University," said Roderick MacLeish Jr, a Boston lawyer who has advised 12 College students on cases before the administrative board.

Courts have intervened in the past when issues of race, gender, and handicap have been involved.

MacLeish said the 1997 lawsuit, in which he and Frankfurter Professor of Law Alan M. Dershowitz argued a case in court for a week before reaching a settlement, involved a handicapped student.

For other students, the Courts have generally been hesitant to become involved unless officials' conduct is deemed "arbitrary and capricious."