Courts have been consistently reluctant to interfere with governing boards' powers to control the administration of institutions of higher education. This deference seems to be based on the belief that board expertise makes it significantly more qualified than are the courts to make the necessary administrative decisions. Uncritical deference by judges to decisions of governing boards of institutions of higher learning may have an unarticulated basis--the courts may wish to support these boards in an embattled era in higher education. They may believe that any decision against a board may so undercut its respect and authority in other critical areas that all doubts should be resolved in favor of the governing body. The cases discussed in this chapter, one of seven in the 1973 Yearbook of School Law, with few exceptions, tend to support this inference. The cases discussed are grouped under: organization and administration, property and buildings, liability, faculty, discrimination, aid to private education, student discipline, student fees and tuition, regulation of student life style, intercollegiate athletics, and accountability to students. (Author/JF)