Wednesday, July 19, 2017

Average Ohio Law Student Debt Approached $100K for the JD Class of 2015


http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2017/07/ohio_law_school_grads_had_aver.html

The Numbers: On July 17, 2017, the Plain Dealer published a Karen Farkas piece, under the headline “Ohio law school grads face debt of nearly $100,000 and few job prospects, report says.” Take a look at this opening:

“Many Ohio law school graduates are facing high debt and few job prospects, according to a study by the Ohio State Bar Association. 

The average 2015 Ohio law school graduate has approximately $98,475 in law school debt, according to a draft report released this month by the Futures Commission. "Only approximately 58 percent of 2015 Ohio law school graduates are employed in jobs requiring bar passage." 

The commission was established by the association more than a year ago to study "a number of challenges surrounding the delivery of legal services in Ohio amid a time of great social, economic, and cultural change, and to offer recommendations for how best to meet those challenges." 

The 29-member commission considered the "unprecedented burdens faced by new lawyers; the need for acquisition of knowledge and the skills necessary to develop and carry on a successful practice; the lack of regulation for new legal service delivery options; and the widening access to justice gap." 

The report provides information on the four topics and provided recommendations. 

Lawschooltransparency.com has recently issued Ohio law school information that includes an estimated average debt of about $132,000 to $271,000 when students who enter law school this fall graduate three years later.

The American Bar Association has posted employment information for 2016 graduates as reported by each law school.

A national study shows median law firm starting salaries have dropped more than 40 percent from 2009 to 2013.” [Emphasis mine]

A large portion, i.e. over 2/5 of that cohort, did not enter the “profession” after having accumlated huge amounts of student debt. Off the top of your head, name several non-legal jobs that would pay a recent law school grad about $98K per year. Remember, “requiring bar passage” does not necessarily mean an attorney position. Think of doc review. Furthermore, if you are not using your JD to practice law, then you will be viewed with more scrutiny. 

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/law_grad_with_no_plan_to_repay_debt_fails_character_and_fitness_mandate_ohi

Previous Ohio Ruling on Student Loans: Back on January 13, 2011, the ABA Journal featured a Debra Cassens Weiss article that was entitled “Law Grad with No Plan to Repay Debt Fails Character and Fitness Mandate, Ohio Top Court Says.” Here is the full text below:

“Ohio State University law grad Hassan Jonathan Griffin of Columbus, Ohio, has a part-time job in the public defender’s office and no feasible plan to repay his law-school and credit-card debt.

That combination means Griffin has so far failed to satisfy the character and fitness qualification to get a law license, the Ohio Supreme Court has ruled. The opinion (PDF) upholds a recommendation by the Supreme Court’s Board of Commissioners on Character and Fitness. 

Griffin had $170,000 in student-loan debt and $16,500 in credit-card debt. He earns $12 an hour at his part-time job with the PD. 

“We accept the board’s findings of fact and conclude that the applicant has neglected his personal financial obligations by electing to maintain his part-time employment with the Public Defender’s Office in the hope that it will lead to a full-time position upon passage of the bar exam, rather than seeking full-time employment,” the opinion says.

Griffin will be able to reapply, however, for another bar exam, in February 2011 or later, and he may submit a new character-and-fitness application, the opinion says.

Above the Law is outraged by the decision. “What the hell kind of legal education system are we running where we charge people more than they can afford to get a legal education, and then prevent them from being lawyers because they can’t pay off their debts?” the blog asks. “If Griffin can’t pass C&F, Ohio might as well say that half of the recent graduates in the state don’t have the ‘character and fitness’ to be a lawyer.” [Emphasis mine]

I suppose that the moral of the story is to not take out too many loans to pay for the ridiculously expensive and risky venture of law school – even if you are working in the field. Hell, Mr. Griffin graduated from the best program in the state and he was in a paid position at a public defender’s office. Even though the job was part-time, that is a better outcome than many JDs who attend TTTs and end up never entering this glutted “profession.”

Conclusion: As it becomes more common for recent law grads to walk away with $160K in student loan debt, expect more of these men and women to become professional students. If nothing else, they can at least put off their loan payments for several years. Interest will continue to accrue and the principle will balloon, of course. Perhaps, some of these fools hope that Congress will wipe out their debt by the time they earn another degree. However, students are not a vital voting bloc and they are not individually or collectively wealthy. Plus, bailouts are for large industries that hire thousands of people – not singular broke-asses with useless academic “credentials.”

Saturday, July 15, 2017

ABA Will Decide Whether Member Diploma Mills Can Use GRE as Alternative Law School Entrance Exam


http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/rather_than_accept_more_entrance_exams_some_law_school_deans_favor_eliminat?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=navigation&utm_campaign=most_read

More Ways to Get Into Law School: On July 13, the ABA Journal published a Stephanie Francis Ward article entitled “Why should law schools have to require LSAT or GRE? Law deans ask the question.” Focus on the portion below:

“The Newton, Pennsylvania-based Law School Admission Council, which administers the LSAT, also submitted a statement (PDF) ahead of the hearing. Law schools have relied on the test for more than 50 years to set a common standard for candidate evaluation, according to the LSAC, and the test is based on solid research and evaluated on a continuing basis. The statement was signed by Christina B. Whitman, chair of its board of trustees, and Kellye Y. Testy, its president and chief executive officer. 

If another admissions test is as good as the LSAT, the statement reads, the LSAC has no objection to law schools using it, and the organization “does not seek a monopoly” in legal education. 

“Today, many law schools are experiencing economic stress as they adjust to changes in the admission and employment markets stemming from structural change in the profession as well as from continuing challenges to the rule of law in society,” the statement reads. “It is tempting during such times of stress to seek to reduce standards of quality, and often these reductions in standards come forward as arguments for innovation and deregulation.” 

“Like the council, and I think everyone in this room, we support equality and fairness in legal education,” Joan E. Van Tol, the LSAC’s general counsel, said at the hearing. “If other tests meet those goals, we support those as well, but we urge the council to set high standards for both validity and reliability.” 

David Yassky, the law school dean at Pace University, is opposed to the proposed revision to Standard 503. “Serious law school applicants,” he wrote in his statement (PDF), will likely continue taking the LSAT, and most if not all law schools will continue to accept it as an entrance exam.” [Emphasis mine]

The law schools are tired of getting drilled for their declining admi$$ion$ “standards.” Law School Transparency has detailed reports on each ABA-accredited diploma factory. Applicants can see that the toilets keep accepting lower LSAT scores. Foolishly, some may be happy that a 143 score might get into a dozen cesspools.

http://abovethelaw.com/2017/07/in-the-lsat-v-gre-battle-should-the-aba-get-involved/?rf=1

Other Coverage: On July 13, 2017, Kathryn Rubino posted an ATL entry labeled “In The LSAT v. GRE Battle, Should The ABA Get Involved?” Check out this opening:

“There’s a battle brewing between the LSAT and the GRE. After years of being the only game in town, the LSAT is now feeling pressure as some law schools have made a move to accept the GRE in lieu of the law school standard. The trend started with Arizona Law, citing decreased barriers to entry, which coincidentally coincides with a decrease in applications, particularly for lower-tier law schools (and some argue that lower barriers aren’t necessarily a good thing). Then Harvard Law shook up the game by deciding to accept the GRE, and all of a sudden, the GRE for law students became mainstream. 

This week, the ABA will hold a hearing on a proposed rule change to Standard 503, which currently allows law schools to accept alternatives to the LSAT (read: the GRE) if they can prove another test is valid and reliable. If the rule change passes, schools will no longer be able to decide an alternate test is valid and reliable, that determination would be the sole province of the ABA. That’s a… major change, as Jeff Thomas, executive director of pre-law programs at Kaplan Test Prep, notes: 

The American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar is set to debate one of the most controversial amendments to its Standards in years. If the ABA adopts its proposed amendments to Standard 503, it will immediately stifle law school attempts to circumnavigate the current LSAT requirement and at least temporarily halt schools’ desire to use the GRE for admissions purposes. However, incorporated into the proposed changes is a call for a process for the ABA to vet admissions exams other than the LSAT, which may set the stage for a sweeping ruling allowing law schools to accept the GRE in the future. Rejecting the proposed amendments will likely result in trickling adoption of the GRE. At Kaplan, we’ll be tracking the issue closely to ensure that students have the most accurate and up-to-date information possible to make informed decisions.

Given this looming change that would radically alter the current trend of legal education, what do law schools think about it? According to a Kaplan survey of 119 law schools, including 18 of the top 30 as ranked by U.S. News & World Report, the opinions are split: 

Of the nearly 120 law schools polled, 61 percent say the ABA should make a statement saying that law schools are either permitted or not permitted to allow applicants to submit GRE scores as an alternative to scores from the LSAT, long the only sanctioned law school admissions exam. Twenty-seven percent say it should not; and 13 percent are unsure.” [Emphasis mine]

The schools want to be able to use different exams as way to get more asses in seats. But they want the backing of the ABA, to help justify their decision to take in applicants who never sat for the LSAT exam.

Conclusion: The American Bar Association will continue to look out for the law school pigs. Expect this organization to allow member schools to accept the GRE, as an alternative to the LSAT. After all, they realize that having a bunch of commodes with 25th percentile scores of 145 – or worse – is embarrassing to the cartel. Now that several respectable in$titution$ accept this exam, it seems this will become standard practice. If this happens, don’t be surprised if ABA schools strongly encourage borderline applicants to take the Graduate Record Examination, instead of the LSAT.

Tuesday, July 11, 2017

Asked and Answered: There Are Too Many Damn Law Schools


http://www.ctlawtribune.com/id=1202792445992/Are-There-Too-Many-Law-Schools?mcode=0&curindex=0

The Question: On July 7, 2017, the Editorial Board of the Connecticut Law Tribune published a piece entitled “Are There Too Many Law Schools?” Take a look at this exposition:

“Have you heard of Charlotte School of Law, or of Whittier Law School? Well, you may not hear of them for much longer. Both were scheduled to close this year, though in both cases there were campaigns by faculty and alumni to keep them open. 

Charlotte has been faltering in recent years, with bad news that has included being placed on probation by the American Bar Association due to the dismal record of its graduates in passing the bar exam and being kicked out of the federal student loan program by the Department of Education. 

Two deans then quit in rapid succession, and the North Carolina attorney general began an investigation of the school's state operating license. Though the school has applied to Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos to be allowed back into the federal student loan program, it is likely that too many current Charlotte Law students have moved to other schools to allow Charlotte to qualify for reinstatement. Whether students would be able to get their student loans discharged due to the school's closing was expected to remain a complicated and frustrating experience for students at the for-profit school. 

Schools like Charlotte, Whittier, and Arizona Summit Law School, another faltering school, illuminate a larger problem, or set of problems. Law schools still struggle to some extent with a diminishing number of applicants, though some suggest that the news reports of all those attorneys working on their computers on the floor in airports when the travel ban hit may inspire a number of people to consider law school after all. But the last few years have seen a steep decline in the number of applicants to law schools, estimated by some as at least 30 percent. In an effort to fill classes, some schools accepted students whose college records would never have supported admission in the past. Then, to no one's surprise, those students failed to pass the bar exam after graduation. The result is a population of young people not able to find employment, yet saddled with significant loans to pay off.” [Emphasis mine]

There are over 200 ABA-accredited diploma mills located in the United States. And by all accounts, only a handful of these are worth attending. Another dozen or so are calculated risks to the student – and I am being a little generous in that assessment. This means that roughly more than 180 are bad investments for the borrowers seeking a law degree. Do you like your odds, lemming?! How do you think you will fare with your 146 LSAT and 2.8 UGPA from Lancaster Bible College, idiot?

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/10/law-schools-agree-there-are-too-many-law-schools/

Prior Judgment: Back on October 6, 2016, Kathryn Rubino posted an ATL entry labeled “Law Schools Agree: There Are Too Many Law Schools.” Enjoy this opening:

“Finally, we get a chance to look behind the curtain and find out what law schools really think. These seemingly inscrutable actors have tremendous pull on the overall direction of the legal profession, but, hidden behind a veil of bureaucracy and academia, observers are often left to reverse engineer their motivations and opinions. But no more, finally they speak. 

Well, sort of. Kaplan Test Prep conducted a survey of law school admissions officers, and participation was high:

For the 2016 survey, 111 of the 205 American Bar Association-accredited law schools were polled by telephone between August and September 2016. Included among the 111 are 12 of the top 25 law schools, as ranked by U.S. News & World Report

So, what exactly did they say? Here’s the big one: 65 percent of schools surveyed agree it “would be a good idea if at least a few law schools closed.” I suppose none of the schools that answered in the affirmative think their institution should be the one that is shuttered. At a time when law schools are said to be in the midst of a “brain drain” with high quality potential applicants eschewing the law school life, this provides some valuable insight. It seems most schools recognize just because a student has the ability to take on educational loans for law school doesn’t mean they should be going to law school. Churning out graduates for the sake of the churn doesn’t benefit the profession. 

Despite this welcomed bit of realism, another data point suggests that even though they recognize more law students for the sake of law students isn’t always a good thing, getting schools to do something about it is more challenging.

24 percent of law schools cut the number of seats for their 2016 class of first-year students, lower than the 35 percent who reported doing so for the 2015 class of 1Ls and and the 54 percent who did for the 2014 class.” [Emphasis mine]

For $ome rea$on, the law school pigs want other commodes to close their doors. They want to remain in operation so that they can continue to financially ruin LEGIONS of law students each year. How admirable, huh?!?! If the bitches and hags had a single shred of integrity, then they would insist of thinning the herd, at the beginning of the process – and not after the individual simpletons graduate with $165K in additional, NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt.

Conclusion: Anyone with an IQ above room temperature knows that there are many damn law schools in this country. As a corollary, the job market for lawyers is GLUTTED. Yet, the federal government continues to annually issue billions of dollars in student loan money to these stench pits. If you are still considering this route at this point in time, then you are a lost cause. Hell, you are the type of person who needs to read the side of a paint can, so that you do not drink the contents. Also, if someone encourages you to go to law school, ask them where they earned their JD and the year in which they graduated. Then ask them if they practice law. If they do so, follow up with how much they make and then inquire about their debt load. I have seen a few Boomers without law degrees push younger people towards this path. By the way, a $48K salary is not impressive, if the person has accumulated large amounts of student loans. 

Wednesday, July 5, 2017

Fourth Tier Trash Can Florida Coastal School of Law to Further Shrink Enrollment and Reduce Classes


http://jacksonville.com/news/education/2017-06-30/florida-coastal-cuts-enrollment-classes-boost-bar-exam-results

Beautiful News!: On June, the Florida Times-Union published an Amanda Williamson piece entitled “Florida Coastal cuts enrollment, classes to boost Bar exam results.” Enjoy this wondrous opening:

“Florida Coastal School of Law plans to cut enrollment and reduce course offerings as its leadership looks to avoid a fate similar to its sister schools in North Carolina and Arizona.

Within the past year, the American Bar Association placed both Charlotte Law School and Arizona Summit Law School on probation for admission policies and academic standards. 

Jacksonville’s Florida Coastal expects to see an enrollment decline for the fall semester as it rolls out stricter admission requirements for incoming first-year students. The tougher criteria is just one piece of the for-profit school’s plan to bolster its own bar passage and employment rates — both issues the school has been criticized for in the past.

“In order to raise standards, we have to shrink the size of our classes,” Florida Coastal Dean Scott DeVito said. 

Research indicates doing well on the Law School Admission Test can result in a better chance of passing the bar on the first try, but that’s not always the case. Schools continue, however, to place heavy weight on the standardized test. 

Florida Coastal intends to raise the minimum score accepted by the law school nearly 7 points.

“That is the type of lever you can pull on to predict bar passage rates,” DeVito said. “It is hard to tell based on GPA and school choice.”

According to the American Bar Association, Florida Coastal extended offers to more than 59 percent of the students who applied in 2016. The year before they offered 71 percent of applicants a spot at the Jacksonville institution. As the criteria increases, those numbers can be expected to go down — at least until the applicant pool matches the quality of student Florida Coastal hopes to enroll.” [Emphasis mine]

Do you still want to take the TTTT plunge, waterhead?!?! This festering pile of garbage readily admits applicants with 2.9 UGPAs and 145 LSAT scores. Without doing so, the enrollment would be even lower now. Once the pigs at this commode realize that if they stop taking such cretins – without losing some faculty – then they will keep accepting morons who have no place representing others in legal matters.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2017/07/after-71-enrollment-decline-florida-coastal-plans-to-further-shrink-1l-class-to-raise-minimum-lsat-s.html#comments

Other Coverage: On July 3, 2017, Paul Caron provided a rundown of the situation at Florida Coa$TTTTal Sewer of Law – in an entry labeled “After 71% Enrollment Decline, Florida Coastal Plans To Further Shrink 1L Class To Raise Minimum LSAT Score By 7 Points And Avoid Fate Of Arizona Summit, Charlotte Law Schools.” Since his report is a cut and paste job, I will provide this comment from that post. It is courtesy of Old Ruster, from July 3, 2017 at 9:31:48 AM.

“Speaking of the LSAT, Coastal's dean stated:

“That is the type of lever you can pull on to predict bar passage rates,” DeVito said. “It is hard to tell based on GPA and school choice.” 

How nice to have in such a clear public statement, a fact that lots of deans of schools with recently-lowered admissions criteria still don't want to admit!!”

Unfortunately, since many fools cannot be bothered to conduct 10 minutes of research into the cost of “legal education” and the GLUTTED job market for lawyers, ABA-accredited stench pits will continue to operate. The swine at Florida Coa$TTTTal claim that they want to take proactive measures to keep enrollment down. Even Pig DeVito has admitted that LSAT scores are a good indicator of those who will pass or fail the bar exam.

https://www.lstreports.com/schools/floridacoastal/

LST Entrance Info: Take a look at the following data from Law School Transparency, regarding this dung heap. For the class that entered Fall 2016:

75th percentile LSAT: 149 
50th percentile LSAT: 144 
25th percentile LSAT: 141
75th percentile UGPA: 3.27
50th percentile UGPA: 2.87
25th percentile UGPA: 2.57 [Emphasis mine]

Truly embarrassing admission numbers. What the hell more needs to be said about those pathetic figures? 

Conclusion: In the final analysis, Florida Coa$TTTTal Sewer of Law is a rancid cess pit with no redeeming qualities. It does not benefit society, students, graduates, potential legal clients, or the “profession.” If you are stupid enough to even consider attending this FOR-PROFIT, FOURTH TIER TRASH PIT, then you have proven yourself to be too damn dumb to order food from a drive through menu. I wouldn’t trust you to walk home alone safely, from the corner convenience store. The odds are higher that you would walk carelessly into traffic, dunce.

Saturday, July 1, 2017

Mainstream Media Outlets Ask “Still Want to Go to Law School, Dumbass?”


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/06/28/law-schools-hunkering-down-enrollment-slips/430213001/

Time to Reconsider: On June 28, 2017, USA Today published a piece from reporter Greg Toppo, under the headline “Why you might want to think twice before going to law school.” Take a look at the following excerpt:

“Future lawyers, heed this. Whittier's demise could be a sign of things to come. 

As several trends hit the law profession — fewer graduates, fewer jobs and the specter of growing automation in legal services — experts say more law schools could take a hit. 

For young lawyers in all but the most elite schools, jobs are already harder to find. While a newly minted Harvard, Yale or Stanford Juris Doctor (JD) will nearly always find security and top-paying work, those attending non-rated or poorly rated schools will struggle as their profession contracts. Even students at moderately rated schools could see their prospects shrink, statistics suggest.” [Emphasis mine]

Did that information come from an angry scamblogger? Hell, this data has been FREELY AVAILABLE for damn near a decade. If you cannot bother to do ten minutes of research regarding the law school gamble, then how do expect to competently represent other people – or companies – in important legal matters?!?! Oh that’s right; you’re “special.”

Scroll down for this nugget:

“As corporate legal departments and law firms operate under growing pressure to cut costs, technology is also displacing young lawyers who in years past would have spent their days doing research. Online startups like LegalZoom, Avvo and LawDingo, many of which also match clients with lawyers, are automating “low-level lawyerly tasks” — not just research, but contracts and wills, among other tasks, [Michael] Horn said. 

“E-discovery” tools are also getting more sophisticated, further reducing the need for humans. 

Automation, Horn said, is “basically making lawyers within big firms more productive, so it’s reducing the need to bring in first-year lawyers, as you did in the past.”

Andrew M. Perlman, dean of Suffolk University Law School in Boston, noted a “significant decline” in the number of students applying to law schools overall, with the market for new lawyers “adjusting to what I think is a ‘new normal.’” 

Technology, he said, “will not make lawyers obsolete, but there will probably be fewer opportunities for lawyers in the future.” [Emphasis mine]

Lemmings, when you are not too busy being dumb, look up Moore’s law. $omehow, this has not yet displaced "law professors" - but administrators will at least consider this route, at some point. Make sure to take a nap after taxing your little pea brain. Of course, Cockroach Andrew Perlman feels that it’s actually “a great time” to enter this gutter “profession.” Then again, the bastard is making a fat salary off of his stupid law students!

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/21/6-questions-to-ask-yourself-before-you-go-to-law-school.html

Ask Yourself: On June 21, 2017, CNBC posted a Leah Ginsburg article entitled “6 questions to ask yourself if you think you want to go to law school.” Here is one small sample:

“But is law school right for you? CNBC spoke with Laura Hosid, law school admissions and career counselor, about the questions you should ask yourself first. 

Why do you want to go to law school?

The biggest mistake people make is going for no good reason or for the wrong reasons, says Hosid. So if it's because you think it looks fun or you want to be rich, you might want to think again… 

Similarly, the idea that being a lawyer will make you rich is off-base, says Hosid. "There are actually a lot, a lot, a lot of jobs that … don't make a lot of money," she says. According to U.S. News & World Report, the median private sector salary was $68,300, and the median public sector salary was $52,000 among J.D. recipients in the class of 2015 at ranked law schools. Only 35 law schools of the 197 ranked reported median private sector salaries in the six figures.” [Emphasis mine]

Keep in mind those figures are based on who responds to the graduate surveys. And those who ended up making $35K in a garbage job tend not to report their weak-ass income – out of a sense of shame. Plus, there is nothing to stop a chump from claiming that he earns $170K per year. Do you think that an ABA-accredited toilet is going to look into such matters?

Also, for $ome rea$on, those without jobs 10 months after earning their law degree are not included in the stats. This further skews the average reported starting salary for new JDs. Imagine how those figures – at each commode - would be reduced with several incomes of zero thrown into the mix. By the way, the schools get away with not taking these into account – as if they are outliers. However, if a large portion of every single damn class remains unemployed – or working in various capacities for free – how the hell can anyone argue that these graduates are an exception?

Conclusion: The CNBC coverage also noted the following: “The truth is, a law degree from a school ranked below the top 14-to-25 does not open the same doors as a degree from a top tier institution[.]” If this strikes you as news, then you have not done any significant research into this important FINANCIAL decision that WILL affect the rest of your life, waterhead. On that note, good luck passing the bar exam, landing numerous paying clients, and having a successful legal career – especially if you graduated from a third tier commode or fourth tier trash pit. Employers can smell the stench of your toilet from a mile away, genius.

Monday, June 26, 2017

Fifth Tier Trash Pit Charlotte School of Law May Lose License to Operate Within North Carolina


http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article157447189.html

Beautiful News!: On June 21, 2017, the News & Observer published a Jane Stancill article, entitled “The clock is ticking for Charlotte School of Law to prove it’s financially stable.” This excerpt should make your day a little brighter, your morning commute smoother, and your breakfast a bit more savory:

“The Charlotte School of Law has until early August to prove its financial stability or face revocation of its license to operate in North Carolina. 

A committee of the UNC Board of Governors, acting on behalf of the full board, voted Wednesday to severely restrict the school’s activities as it seeks to survive long enough to graduate its remaining 100 students.

The action Wednesday gives the for-profit school a limited amount of time to prove that it’s stable. The conditions must be met or Charlotte School of Law’s license would automatically be revoked, and it would cease operations in the state. 

The law school, already on probation by the American Bar Association, cannot admit new students and must present evidence to UNC by Aug. 1 that it is in compliance with state licensure standards. It must have a sufficient tuition guaranty bond, which would refund students’ prepaid tuition if the school went out of business. And by Aug. 10, the school must obtain permission from the ABA to “teach out” its remaining students and a decision by the U.S. Department of Education to allow the students access to financial aid.

The school’s president, Chidi Ogene, who was present at the committee’s meeting in Chapel Hill on Wednesday, declined to comment. 

The school’s officials have told UNC’s General Administration that it has a remedial plan to continue operations and restructure its debt. They are seeking re-certification from the Department of Education so that the school’s students can participate in the federal loan program. The school has 11 first-year students, 55 second-year students and 34 third-year students. In addition, 73 students have taken a leave of absence, meaning they are no longer enrolled but haven’t officially withdrawn.” [Emphasis mine]

Yes, that is a truly vibrant law school, huh?!?! Simply put, if the commode cannot admit new idiots, then it is in serious trouble. Also, notice that the cockroaches must get the ABA’s permission to teach out the remaining simpletons. 

http://abovethelaw.com/2017/06/much-maligned-law-school-in-very-serious-danger-of-losing-its-license-to-operate/

Other Coverage: On June 22, 2017, Staci Zaretski posted an ATL entry labeled “Much Maligned Law School In Very Serious Danger Of Losing Its License To Operate.” Enjoy this stellar opening sequence:

“Last month, we reported that the University of North Carolina’s Board of Governors had decided to review whether or not the Charlotte School of Law would be able to retain its license to operate within the state. Earlier this week, the Board of Governors met to determine the law school’s fate, and the result may sound the death knell for the embattled school. 

The school, which is already on probation with the American Bar Association, must now deal with severe restrictions as it attempts to prove that it’s stable enough to continue operations. The News & Observer has additional details: 

The law school … cannot admit new students and must present evidence to UNC by Aug. 1 that it is in compliance with state licensure standards. It must have a sufficient tuition guaranty bond, which would refund students’ prepaid tuition if the school went out of business. And by Aug. 10, the school must obtain permission from the ABA to “teach out” its remaining students and a decision by the U.S. Department of Education to allow the students access to financial aid. 

If Charlotte Law does not meet these conditions, its license to operate will automatically be revoked. (For what it’s worth, Charlotte isn’t the only InfiLaw school that’s been ordered to post a surety bond for its students financial safety. Last month, the Arizona State Board for Private Postsecondary Education required Arizona Summit Law to do the same, to the tune of $1.5 million.) 

Charlotte Law currently has 100 students — 11 1Ls, 55 2Ls, and 34 3Ls — who currently do not have access to the federal loan program. As noted in the News & Observer, many of those students want to complete their degrees at the school because they “don’t have other options.” 

Joe Knott, a UNC board member who had reservations about the school’s continued operation, said what is perhaps the most appropriate thing that’s ever been said about a law school that’s in such big trouble: “I’m wondering, from all that I’ve heard about this school, is allowing the students to remain in such a school actually doing them any favors? Would it not be better for them to stop this endeavor and find an educational opportunity at a better school?” [Emphasis mine]

Anyone dumb enough to even consider this dung pile – let alone submit an application to it – ought to be stomped in the nuts until they puke. This is the worse than borrowing an ass-load of money, and wasting it on things you don’t need. Hell, at least in that scenario, you can walk away from the loan. Plus, you would not be pissing away three of your income-earning years, sitting in a classroom learning mindless junk

Conclusion: In the last analysis, CharloTTTTTe Sewer of Law is a rancid, vile, filthy garbage pit that preys on the mentally weak fools who enroll there. It is operated by sick academic pigs, and owned by a Chicago private equity firm, Sterling Partners. Why in the hell would anyone choose to apply to such a stink pit?! Does it make sense to pay $42,320 in annual tuition to attend this FIFTH TIER PILE OF EXCREMENT? Do you think – for one microsecond - that law firms, government agencies, or non-law employers will want to hire you, Stupid?!?! With that in mind, how do you plan to repay $160K+ in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, waterhead?!

Wednesday, June 21, 2017

Wipe Thoroughly: Which ABA-Accredited Diploma Mills Have the Most Unemployed Graduates?


http://abovethelaw.com/2017/05/the-law-schools-with-the-most-unemployed-graduates-2016/?rf=1

Toilets on Parade: On May 24, 2017, Staci Zaretsky posted an ATL entry labeled “The Law Schools With The Most Unemployed Graduates (2016).” Take a look at this straightforward opening:

“How is the employment scene looking for recent law school graduates? We’ll start with the good news: compared to the class of 2015, a larger percentage of 2016 law school graduates were able to find full-time, long-term jobs where bar passage was required (that were not school-funded) within 10 months of receiving their degrees. About 62 percent of 2016 graduates landed these plum jobs, up from 59 percent in 2015. 

Now, for the bad news: the good news we just discussed wasn’t so good after all, as the total number of desirable law jobs recent graduates landed declined by 4 percent since 2015 — that’s 1,033 fewer jobs. The only reason that the overall employment rate increased is because there were 2,860 fewer law school graduates trying to secure jobs. As we mentioned previously, this is the third straight year that the declining number of law graduates has propped up the employment rate while the number of law jobs actually declined.

So, with fewer law school graduates competing for jobs, one would assume (or hope) that would mean that fewer law school graduates were unemployed 10 months after receiving their degrees, right? Wrong. 

Law.com produced several helpful charts based on law school employment data for the class of 2016. Today, we will highlight the most alarming chart of all, the 20 law schools with the highest percentage of unemployed graduates. Here are the top 10 law schools on that chart for your sadistic viewing pleasure: 

1. Charlotte Law: 30.88 percent 
2. Southwestern Law: 28.97 percent 
3. Thomas Jefferson Law: 28.57 percent 
4. Florida Coastal Law: 27.76 percent 
5. Valparaiso Law: 24.38 percent 
6. U. San Diego Law: 24.31 percent 
7. Elon Law: 23.60 percent 
8. LaVerne Law: 23.53 percent 
9. Chapman Law: 23.42 percent 
10. U. Pacific McGeorge Law: 23.02 percent (corrected) That was depressing.” [Emphasis mine]

You will notice that all ten of these trash cans have the following in common: (a) they are private schools; and (b) they are low-ranked landfills. They each offer piss poor employment prospects – even for those who end up in the top 10%-20% of the class. Huge tuition will be rammed down your throat, as a student at any of these “institutions of higher learning.” Still want to sign on the dotted line at any of these piles of excrement, Dumbass?!?! 

http://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2017/05/16/where-the-law-jobs-are-the-2016-edition/

Charts and Graphs: On May 16, 2017, Law.com featured a Karen Sloan article entitled “Where the Law Jobs Are: The 2016 Edition.” The text was essentially covered by Above the Law in its entirety. 

https://public.tableau.com/profile/publish/ABA-School-Jobs-2016/Story1#!/publish-confirm

Go to the charts and select the entitled “Unemployed.” Here is the next group of ten, foul garbage heaps, as listed by Law.com:

11. University of San Francisco School of Law: 22.86 percent
12. Golden Gate University School of Law: 20.54 percent 
13. University of Oregon School of Law: 20.16 percent 
14. Western Michigan University Cooley Law School: 19.48 percent 
15. Willamette University College of Law: 19.30 percent 
16. DePaul University College of Law: 19.23 percent 
17. Santa Clara University School of Law: 18.60 percent 
18. Campbell University Norman Adrian Wiggins School of Law: 18.45 percent 
19. Barry University School of Law: 17.41% 
20. Liberty University School of Law: 17.24%

That listing only includes one public school. Starting to see a pattern here, genius?!?! Anyone enrolled at any of the 20 piles of waste above is simply too damn dumb to represent other people in legal matters. Would you want any of these clowns to draft a simple will for your grandmother?! Perhaps you would be okay with these dunces filing a small claims action on your behalf. Then again, if you have an Associate’s degree or some common sense, then you are most likely capable of writing it up yourself and presenting your side well in a less formal court setting. Frankly, I wouldn’t trust these idiots to order food for someone else at a restaurant. Hell, I’m not sure I would feel confident letting any of these morons drive me around in a car. 

Conclusion: In the final analysis, if you even consider any of these 20 cesspools, then you deserve your fate. If you end up owing $200K+ in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt – and the only job you can land is “sandwich artist” – who cares? You chose to attend a pathetic pile of rot for your “legal education” – and you should have done some basic research, fool! If you bothered to look up job outcomes for these commodes – for more than five minutes – then you decided to ignore the data. Do not try to seek sympathy on this site. The information has been out there for damn near a decade. And best of all, it is free to peruse. Think about that when you are “freelancing” as a dog walker, Bitch. Be nice to the successful people who hire you, and they might tip you. Also, don’t forget to pick up Buddy’s turds either. Hell, those who pay will likely be younger than your ass too, Stupid.
 
Web Analytics