In Board of Regents of State Colls. v. Roth (408 U.S. 564 [1972]) the Court concluded that a nontenured college professor had no "liberty" or "property" interest which was offended when his contract was not renewed. Though the Court found no "liberty" or "property" interest implicated in that case, it sets forth a clear explanation of what constitutes "liberty" and "property" interests. After a long historical discussion about how those concepts have been evolved throughout our law in the context of when a person is entitled to a hearing the Court reached the conclusion that "where a person's good name, reputation, honor, or integrity is at stake because of what the government is doing to him, notice and an opportunity to be heard are essential" (at 573). In denying the college professor's application for a hearing the Court concluded that the nonrenewal of his contract did not damage his reputation and obviously the denial of disability benefits did not damage a person's reputation and thus no hearing was required.