Sorry, but with a private school it's all a matter of what's covered in the contract between the school and its students.
***
And I'm saying that, as far as I can tell, based on the information in the article, it doesn't look like his actions violated any contract, at least not according to the terms indicated in the article.
There is not enough information in the article to determine whether or not there were contractual breaches by either the student or the university. That's my whole point. I think the outcome is stupid and reprehensible, but on the facts presented I can't say the university is not within its rights. That all depends on facts 'not in evidence.'