Heidi Anderson, president of the University of Maryland Eastern Shore, is suing the former professor who accused her of plagiarism, seeking $1 million in damages.

Anderson’s suit alleges that Donna Satterlee, who taught human ecology at the university until last year, defamed the president when she claimed several paragraphs of Anderson’s 400-page dissertation from 1986 were lifted verbatim from another academic paper.

The case heads to court for an injunction hearing on Friday and marks Anderson’s first legal action since a series of complaints against university leadership emerged this summer.

Four current and former employees at the small, historically Black college in Princess Anne have filed separate suits since July, levying accusations that range from sabotaging academic standards to fraud.

Satterlee is one of them, claiming that she was unlawfully terminated, and that the university preferentially hired African American employees over white and Asian applicants.

She is representing herself in the suit, which names Anderson, members of her leadership team and system Chancellor Jay Perman. The state’s attorney general’s office filed a motion to dismiss Satterlee’s case in October, arguing that at the time of her “voluntary resignation” she waived her right to bring any legal action against UMES.

Anderson did not respond to requests for comment on the defamation lawsuit.

Satterlee, in a phone interview, said she was worried about the suit but had “no regrets.” Satterlee doesn’t have a lawyer and said she has never been in court before.

The system, through its spokesperson Michael Sandler, declined to comment on Satterlee’s case, but noted that the Office of the Attorney General and the University System of Maryland are not involved in Anderson’s defamation lawsuit.

Satterlee told The Banner in October that she put Anderson’s dissertation through computer software that looks for and flags instances of potential plagiarism. She said at the time she scrutinized Anderson’s dissertation because of negative interactions she had with the UMES president previously.

After the allegations came to light, Anderson requested an assessment of the claims, which the University System of Maryland is currently conducting.

Anderson has served as president of the HBCU in Somerset County, which this fall received a second gift of $38 million from billionaire philanthropist MacKenzie Scott, since 2018. She earned her doctoral degree in pharmacy administration from Purdue University, where she published the dissertation in question.

She is the second college president in the public university system accused of plagiarizing. University of Maryland, College Park President Darryll Pines was accused last fall of inappropriately lifting passages without attribution in a scientific paper he co-authored in 2002. The university system concluded its investigation last week, clearing Pines of wrongdoing. They are among a growing number of Black university leaders across the country accused of plagiarism.

Anderson, according to the lawsuit she filed in October, has suffered “severe reputational damage”; a loss of professional and economic opportunities including speaking engagements; “humiliation and emotional distress”; and ongoing harm to her credibility and career prospects, which she claims are “worth in the six figures.” Anderson’s base salary, according to a system spokesperson, is $438,956.

The suit accuses Satterlee of acting with “actual malice” by publicizing the plagiarism accusations. The Banner was the first to report her allegations.

Anderson’s personal lawsuit states that Satterlee’s plagiarism allegations caused her “severe emotional distress, including anxiety, humiliation, sleeplessness and reputational shame.”

The lawsuit claims that Satterlee’s allegations are false, citing an affidavit submitted by Holly Mason, a professor emeritus at Purdue University who oversaw Anderson’s 1986 doctoral dissertation. Mason’s affidavit states that he reviewed each chapter of the dissertation, provided guidance on citations and that no member of the doctoral committee identified any errors in citation, according to the lawsuit.

UMES’ Board of Visitors wrote a letter in late September supporting Anderson.

“In recent months and years, the University of Maryland Eastern Shore (UMES), its president Dr. Heidi M. Anderson, and members of her leadership team have been the targets of a series of unfounded and deeply troubling accusations,” the letter signed by board members reads. “These claims — ranging from allegations of discrimination and fiscal mismanagement to a recent, anonymously sourced charge of plagiarism — are not only baseless but also appear to follow a calculated pattern aimed at discrediting Dr. Anderson’s leadership and legacy.”

While Anderson chose to countersue Satterlee, there are other lawsuits she has not yet addressed.

Cui Fang, another former professor at the university, is representing herself in a lawsuit that claims leadership at the HBCU sabotaged academic standards, falsified enrollment numbers and engaged in fraud with federal funds. The state’s attorney general office filed a motion to dismiss the case in October, finding it “rife with personal grievances and critiques of the university’s administration and staff.”

The claims in Fang’s lawsuit echo those made by Sandeep Gopalan, a current faculty member who previously served as vice president for research at the university, as well as a lawsuit filed in August by Jacob Doe, a pseudonym for a faculty member at the university.

The Doe lawsuit alleges university leadership launched a “smear campaign” and falsely accused him of creating a hostile work environment. The state’s attorney general’s office filed in December to dismiss Doe’s case, arguing that his suit “fails to plausibly allege” any of his complaints.

Gopalan, who is also representing himself, is accusing Anderson and other leaders at the university and the state system of fraud concerning federal research grants.

The state’s attorney general’s office filed a motion to dismiss Gopalan’s case in November, arguing that the “sprawling lawsuit” by Gopalan consists “largely of disjointed and unrelated grievances.”

“Setting Dr. Gopalan’s personal opinions aside,” the state’s motion to dismiss reads, “he presents no facts that the individual defendants were grossly negligent or acted with malice."

Banner reporter Dylan Segelbaum contributed to this article.

Correction: This story has been updated to reflect that Princess Anne is a town, not a county.

About the Education Hub

This reporting is part of The Banner’s Education Hub, community-funded journalism that provides parents with resources they need to make decisions about how their children learn. Read more.