Thursday, December 12, 2013
Tuition: California residents attending this commode on a full-time basis will be charged $45,225.75 in tuition - for the 2013-2014 school year. Out of state, full-time law students at UCLA will be pistol-whipped with a big-ass tuition bill of $51,719.75 - for 2013-2014. Yes, that is one hell of a bargain for the students, right?!?!
Ranking: According to Vagina Bob Morse of US “News” & World Report, UCLA Sewer of Law is the 17th greatest, most spectacular and amazing law school in the United States. Don’t be fooled by this rating. You need to focus on the job outlook facing the toilet’s graduates.
Employment Placement Statistics: The Employment Summary for the Class of 2012 shows that there were 333 total members in this cohort. Employment status was unknown for one graduate. As such, the pigs published a nine-month rate of 91 percent, i.e. 302/332. Of course, this figure includes non-law jobs, part-time work, and temporary assignments.
UCLA $chool of Law hired 40 grads from this class in university or law school-funded positions! Of that amount, only nine of those jobs were long-term and full-time. Furthermore, 28 of those jobs were garbage posts, i.e. short-term and part-time, designed to bump up the trash can’s placement rate. Without these 40 BS jobs, the placement rate for the UCLA JD Class of 2012 would have been 78.9%, i.e. 262/332. What a “prestigious” in$titution, huh?!?!
Average Law Student Indebtedness: US “News” lists the average law student indebtedness - for those members of the UCLA Law Class of 2012 who incurred debt for law school - as $109,539. Hell, 82 percent of this school’s 2012 class took on such toxic debt. Remember that this figure does not include undergraduate debt – and it also does not take accrued interest into account, while the student is enrolled.
Administrator and Faculty Pay: Let’s see how well the pigs are doing, in contrast to their debt-strapped recent graduates. For this info, I cite to the figures - for 2011 - compiled by David Lat in his May 30, 2013 entry, “How Much Does Your Law Professor Make? UCLA Law Edition.” He states that he received the data from the Sacramento Bee.
“Here are the ten highest-paid faculty members at UCLA Law:
1. Rachel Moran (dean) – $427,825.01
2. Seana Shiffrin – $369,024.00
3. Kirk J. Stark – $358,346.61
4. Steven A. Bank – $358,183.13
5. Stephen M. Bainbridge – $356,619.39
6. Jennifer L. Mnookin – $348,490.82
7. Kal Raustiala – $344,069.04
8. Sharon Dolovich – $336,199.01
9. Devon W. Carbado – $323,208.49
10. Mark Greenberg – $320,519.51” [Emphasis mine]
TTTT Law Journals: Take a look at the numerous offerings of politically correct academic journals at this public dump. Here are just a few examples: Asian Pacific American Law Journal; Dukeminier Awards Journal for Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Law; Journal of Islamic and Near Eastern Law; and the Women’s Law Journal.
Now, take a look at the following description:
“The National Black Law Journal has been committed to scholarly discourse exploring the intersection of race and the law for thirty-five years. The NBLJ was started in 1970 by 5 African-American law students and 2 African-American law professors. The Journal was the first of its kind in the country. The Journal has aimed to build on this tradition by publishing articles that make a substantive contribution to current dialogue taking place around issues such as affirmative action, employment law, the criminal justice system, community development and labor issues. The Journal has a commitment to publish articles that inspire new thought, explore new alternatives and contribute to current jurisprudential stances.”
Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature believe that being a student editor on any of these fifth-rate law journals will help anyone land a decent legal job?!?! Academics love to espouse liberal ideas, but in the end they don’t really care about anything other than keeping their grossly overpaid positions.
Conclusion: The Univer$ity of California, Lo$ Angele$ $chool of Law is a gamble - for the students. ABA-accredited diploma mills are run for the benefit of the “professors.” Based on this chart from Economic Modeling Specialists, Inc., California has the SECOND MOST GLUTTED lawyer job market in the entire damn country. Good luck trying to eke out a living, while paying back your massive student loan, on a $40K annual salary in pricey Southern California, Bitch.
Posted by Nando at 5:34 AM
Sunday, December 8, 2013
Rutgers University School of Law-Camden Knowingly Admitted Students Who Didn’t Take the LSAT; The Pigs Receive a Slap on the Wrist from the ABA
The announcement: The American Bar Association cockroaches issued a December 4, 2013 press release labeled “ABA accreditation committee sanctions Rutgers University School of Law-Camden.” Read the portion below:
“The Accreditation Committee of the American Bar Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar today reported that it has sanctioned Rutgers University School of Law-Camden for violating the ABA Standards for Approval of Law Schools.
The committee found that Rutgers-Camden violated Standard 503, which requires law schools to use a valid and reliable admissions test, and Interpretation 503-1, which requires law schools that use an admissions test other than the Law School Admission Test to establish the test’s validity and reliability in determining an applicant’s ability to complete the J.D. program.
Rutgers-Camden operated an admissions program, without obtaining a variance from the ABA, that allowed some applicants to use a standardized graduate admissions test score instead of an LSAT score to gain admission to the law school. The school subsequently qualified for a variance but elected to suspend the program.
The accreditation committee imposed a public censure on the law school, which must post the censure document prominently on its website home page for one year. The censure is also posted on the website of the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar.
The committee also imposed a $25,000 monetary penalty based on the benefit the school received from operating the program.” [Emphasis mine]
Yes, that immense $25,000 fine is sure going to deter other ABA-accredited filth pits from engaging in the same conduct, right?!?! What the hell is the point of having “standards,” when the punishment for violations of said regulations amounts to a mere slap on the wrist?! By the way, if the school admitted 70-80 students under this scheme, then the pigs received a few million dollars in federally-backed student loan money. I know that "law professors" love to state that all lawyers suck at math, but you would need to be a waterhead in order to think that a $25K fine - for receiving millions - is adequate.
Other Coverage: On December 5, 2013, the Philadelphia Inquirer published reporter Jonathan Lai’s piece “Rutgers-Camden law school fined over avoiding LSATs.” Check out the following excerpt:
"In a three-paragraph statement, the law school said it had violated procedural aspects of the bar association's standards.
"We were negligent in failing to seek a variance, regret and apologize for this procedural violation and accept the ABA censure as appropriate," the statement reads.
Between 2006 and 2012, the law school admitted dozens of students who took tests other than the LSAT. In 2009, the bar association sent a memo to all accredited law schools clarifying its policy requiring the LSAT, except with prior arrangement." [Emphasis mine]
Yeah, sure you bastards were negligent - and Salma Hayek just scratched her name into my back! $omehow, this conduct is ALWAYS an “error” or an “accident.” It’s also uncanny how these “mistakes” benefit the law school swine every single damn time. By the way, does anyone with an IQ over 80 believe that the administrators at RuTTger$ Univer$iTTy Sewer of Law-Camden were not aware that they were admitting dozens of students who had not taken the LSAT, without first seeking a variance from the ABA?!?!
On December 4, 2013, the ABA Journal posted Mark Hansen’s piece, “Rutgers School of Law-Camden is fined $25K and censured for accrediting violations.” Here is his concluding paragraph:
“The committee also fined the school $25,000 for the benefit it received from operating the program without the required variance. That money will be used by the section to help enforce the standards.”
According to the commode, in-state residents attending full-time for the 2013-2014 academic year 2013-14 will be charged $22,746 in tuition. Non-resident, full-time law students at this notorious trash heap will be ass-raped to the tune of $34,478 in tuition - for 2013-2014. Essentially, the pigs will be penalized the cost of a single year of one New Jersey resident’s tuition. The ABA report noted that the school admitted between 70-80 students without an LSAT. Yes, that will teach the bastards a lesson, right?!?!
Conclusion: The criminals at the American Bar Association CLEARLY DO NOT GIVE ONE DAMN about law students. The schools are run for the benefit of the failed lawyers known as “professors.” During orientation, the bitches and hags constantly tell their victims that this is a “noble profession.” If you believe that academic nonsense, then you should not be allowed to make any decision that might impact another person. In fact, if you buy the rats’ drivel, you should be declared mentally unfit to enter into a contract.
In the final analysis, the Rutgers University Sewer of Law-Camden already had a reputation lower than rat piss. As a result of this worthless penalty, the rodents will likely lower their admi$$ion$ criteria even further - in order to maintain enrollment. The ABA merely decided to hand down this “punishment,” because the cockroaches felt that they had to do something - so that they could “show” the public that they do enforce their “standards.” Apparently, RuTTger$ would have been fine had the dolts simply applied for a variance in advance. I wouldn't be surprised to see the supposed 91st greatest law school in the country admit students who have at least a 2.5 undergrad GPA and a 148 LSAT. I can see it now: "Okay, so this guy provided a picture of his girlfriend's feet on his Personal Statement. However, he did graduate from University of Phoenix and he has a 2.8 UGPA."
Posted by Nando at 6:23 AM
Sunday, December 1, 2013
Profiles in Academic Excrement: Ryan Calo, Assistant “Law Professor” at the University of Washington
The Bastard’s “Argument”: On November 24, 2013, a sewer rat called Ryan Calo wrote a piece for Forbes, with the idiotic headline “Why Now Is A Good Time To Apply To Law School.” Before listing his three $elf-$erving reasons for applying, Cockroach Calo states that his remarks are addressed to “those who think they want to be lawyers someday and are simply not pulling the trigger on applying because of all the bad news.”
In the swine’s own words:
“1. Fewer applicants means schools compete fiercely for decent students.
A law school faced with fewer applicants must either lower its admissions standards or shrink its class size. (University of Washington, where I work, has chosen the latter.) Regardless, schools are competing feverishly for good students. An applicant who, a few years ago, would have been wait-listed at a top twenty school, may now find herself with a scholarship. A smaller class size, meanwhile, unless offset by layoffs or a long hiring freeze, translates into more individual attention for the students that do enroll.
2. A lot of law jobs will be opening up over the next five to ten years.
My parents are part of a large generation so large they are known as the Baby Boomers. My father retired last month and my mother plans to retire soon. Even if people work longer than in the past, many (many) people will be leaving the workforce in the next five to ten years. Some of these people will be lawyers. The demographics are such that knowledgeable folks like the head of the Washington Bar Association are predicting a market gap. They worry that future demand for legal services will not be met by a dwindling supply.
3. Reports of the death of the legal market are greatly exaggerated.
One premise of these predictions is that clients are moving away from relying on enormous law firms that bill them by the hour. A second is that technology is changing the face of legal services in ways that eliminate lawyerly tasks, such as the drafting of a will.
Both of these claims are true. I just don’t know what they prove.” [Emphasis mine]
Analysis: Let’s break down this academic thief’s “case” for applying to law school now.
Regarding point one, Aaron Nathaniel Taylor - “professor” at Saint Louis University Sewer of Law - made the same weak-ass argument back on October 11, 2011. In that NaTTTional Juri$TTT opinion piece, he stated the following:
“And if applications fall again during the 2011-2012 cycle, as predicted, applicants will find themselves in a very favorable environment for gaining admission. At some schools, applicants who would have been considered “borderline” just two years ago might be shoo-ins for admission this year. So the strategic benefit of applying during a string of down years is worth ample consideration.”
Take a look at this Average Law Student Indebtedness chart, provided by US “News” & World Report, for the JD Class of 2012. Keep in mind that these figures do not account for interest that accrues while the student is enrolled. They also exclude student debt from undergrad. How in the hell does the typical unconnected law student benefit by incurring an additional $120K-$180K in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt?!?!
Check out this Oregon State Bar bulletin labeled “Restaging the Third Act: Baby Boomer Attorneys Diversify Career Option as They Reach Their 60s.”
In short, older attorneys don’t retire. This is white collar work, consisting mostly of shuffling paperwork. The article notes that old-ass lawyers do the following: reduce their work schedule and hours; continue as independent consultants; and work from home. Again, we are talking about greedy Boomer pigs who do not want to see their income shrink.
Calo’s second “argument” is comical. In fact, I had to suppress my laughter. Ryan, if you truly believe your own drivel, then you need to be committed to a hospital for the clinically stupid. Your argument is akin to the following: “You should climb into a lion cage at the zoo. All of them will be well fed. Many of them will be old and weak.”
By the way, Ass-Hat: are those Washington State Bar cockroaches aware that Economic Modeling Specialists Inc. showed that their state has the 20th most GLUTTED lawyer job market in the country?! In particular, Washington will have an estimated 619 annual attorney openings from 2010-2015. In 2009 alone, 935 passed the state’s bar exam.
Lastly, Calo’s third point is a straw man. None of the scam-bloggers has stated that the legal market is dying. We have simply pointed out that it is GLUTTED. This means that tons of law graduates each year are competing for fewer attorney jobs. For example, the JD Class of 2012 had 46,346 members - all competing for a total of 28,567 positions where bar passage was required! Do you see how that impacts students, dolt?!?!
Hell, you accepted reality and admitted that fewer Biglaw clients are relying on the billable hour and that technology is eating away at lawyer tasks. If you cannot figure out the effects of these two developments, Ryan, then you have no business teaching others anything.
Conclusion: Ryan Calo DOES NOT GIVE ONE DAMN about you, the law student or recent graduate. He doesn’t care what happens to you upon graduation. If you end up in doc review, selling insurance, waiting tables, or serving up lattes, it does not concern him in the slightest. Note that this rodent DID NOT ONCE MENTION student debt, in his entire piece. He merely wants to spread the lie that now is a good time to apply to - and enroll in - law school. Remember, this jackal makes a living off of fools’ decision to attend his commode.
Posted by Nando at 8:38 AM
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
The $elf-Intere$ted Parasite’s “Case” for Another Year:
On November 4, 2013, a dung beetle calling itself Edward Zelinsky posted an Oxford University Press blog entry labeled “Add a fourth year to law school.” Take a look at his excrementitiously ripe “argument”:
“Three considerations counsel the need for an additional year of law school:
First, there is today much more law to learn than there was in the past. There are today whole new fields of law which did not exist a generation ago, e.g., health care law. Moreover, within pre-existing areas of the law, the amount of law has expanded enormously over the last two decades…
Second, through expanded LLM programs, we are de facto creeping towards four years of legal education. In many areas of the law, such as tax, LLM degrees have grown in prominence. Several factors are fueling the expansion of LLM programs. Chief among these is that there is now more law to cover in a fourth year of law school.
Rather than the currently haphazard growth of LLM programs, it would be more sensible to require universally a fourth year of education for all law students.
Third, many of the same critics who favor a two year law school curriculum also support expanded clinical education for law students. Such expanded clinical education should not come at the expense of substantive legal education but in addition to it.” [Emphasis mine]
Keep in mind that Cockroach Edward A. Zelinsky is something called the “Morris and Annie Trachman Professor of Law” at the 58th "greatest" law school in the country, i.e, the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law of Yeshiva University. Now to the rodent’s conclusion:
“An ancillary benefit of a fourth year of legal education would, in the short run, be a reduction in the supply of law school graduates. A fourth year would also abate the job-related pressures students currently feel after the second year of law school by giving students another bite of the employment-related apple after their third year.
The world is more complicated than it used to be. For better or worse, the law’s complexity has grown apace. Well-trained lawyers in the 21st century will need to know more law than did their predecessors. A mandatory, universal fourth year of law school is the right response to the shortcomings of legal education in a complex world.” [Emphasis mine]
Yes, the rat is clearly concerned with the attorney GLUT in this country, right?!?! By the way, law school doesn’t teach people how to practice law, Bitch. At this point, the students are bored to death by the third year.
Elie Mystal posted a November 5, 2013 ATL entry entitled “Law Professor Suggests Adding An Extra Year To Law School — Seriously?” He rips Zelinsky’s garbage argument to shreds, and then delivers this epic conclusion:
“If technology is supposed to decrease the cost of legal education, then why hasn’t it already? Wh[y] hasn’t tuition at Cardozo gone down over the past ten years? Why are law schools terrified about the decreasing number of law school applicants? Is Professor Zelinsky honestly suggesting that somehow four years of law school will be cheaper than three? Why don’t we focus on retarding the current administrative outlays before we try to increase the cost of school by 33 percent?
Zelinsky’s idea is a joke, and not a funny one. It’s a callous thought experiment by a professor who seems more interested in helping law schools take advantage of their students, instead of seriously looking at what law students need in this challenging market.” [Emphasis mine]
“Law professors” love to joke that lawyers suck at math, but Pig Zelinsky’s piece takes that to a whole new level of stupid.
On November 7, 2013, MA of Outside the Law School Scam authored a post labeled “Edward Zelinsky: The Most Deluded Law Professor I Have Seen Yet.” Check out this brilliant portion below:
“I see. So adding a fourth year of law school is going to cause administrators to say, "Hold on guys! These students are paying us way too much in tuition now. We need to cut costs pronto!" And this will be aided in some mysterious way by "technology". Ed, I see that you care more about buying a new Mercedes than the fact that the majority of your students will be unable to afford the lifestyle your school's glossy law porn promised them. What have law school administrators done to date that would lead anyone to the conclusion that adding another year of potential revenue will lead them to start thinking more about students? Most law students are already carrying educational debt from undergrad when schools like Cardozo add another $276,000 to the tally. A fourth year will only allow law school admins to hire more useless faculty and for people like Ed Zelinsky to keep writing more academic books about IRAs and how Baby Boomers can save more for retirement.” [Emphasis mine]
My only disagreement with this entire article is the headline. I doubt that the academic thief is delusional. He is merely trying to make potential law school applicants believe that he has their best interests at heart. This is akin to the man who slowly approaches little kids with his old van, and tells them that their father asked him to pick them up from school today.
Conclusion: Edward Zelinsky is a shameless turd. The jackal even compares “legal education” to medical school. Apparently, he does not understand that medical students will enter a true profession, i.e. one that looks out for and protects its students and practitioners. In the final analysis, this sewer rat does not give one damn about YOU, the law student or potential applicant. He wants to burden you with an additional year of law school. Remember that the bastard is aware of continuously falling applications and enrollment at ABA-accredited diploma mills. His suggestion would merely ensure that the commodes and trash pits would rake in more money with fewer students.
Posted by Nando at 7:51 AM
Saturday, November 23, 2013
Tuition: This pile of waste has not yet opened its filthy doors. Of course, that doesn’t stop these pigs from charging non-resident, full-time students $23,760 in tuition - for the 2014-2015 school year. In-state, full time UNT law students will be charged a rate of $12,540 for 2014-2015, once the $1,500 partial tuition waiver is applied.
Why Attend This Vile Toilet?: In the pigs’ own words:
“WE OFFER AN INNOVATIVE APPROACH TO LEGAL EDUCATION.
We are a new law school, with a fresh emphasis on learning by doing. We utilize the best instructional practices, offer engaged, experiential and collaborative learning, and provide ongoing assessment for our students. Since sound legal judgment is cultivated by experience, we give you ample opportunities to do real law. Most of our upper level courses include a “lab” component that applies the subject matter while developing practical competencies. And our students actively participate in practice settings while receiving mentoring and guidance.” [Emphasis mine]
You will still be taught by failed attorneys known as “law professors.” Most of these dolts will have roughly seven minutes of experience as lawyers. If "the law" is so wonderful and amazing, why aren't these old bitches and hags practicing?!?! Plus, this school has no alumni network at all!
Message from the Swine Dean: Arlen Specter-doppelganger Royal Furgeson puts forth the following reason for attending his outhouse:
“So you want to go to law school. Why should you consider us, the UNT Dallas College of Law, a brand new school? Without making any extravagant promises, I can think of a few reasons, and not simply because I am the Dean.
Our goal is to be a teaching law school, concentrating on student learning, but with a different vision of what that means. For one thing, in the first year and beyond, your courses will include periodic feedback and assessments during the course, not the usual single test at the end of each semester. This will help you know how well you are learning the material, and how to improve. It also will help us monitor how effectively we are teaching. We don’t want anyone to fall behind if we can prevent it. So we will be challenging you, but we will also be supportive.” [Emphasis mine]
Cockroach Specter, you will recall, was the author of the idiotic “magic bullet” theory, in order to help cover up the November 22, 1963 assassination that took place in Dealey Plaza - and he went to Yale Law School! In the final analysis, Furgeson is also grasping at straws - in an attempt to justify his unaccredited filth pit’s existence. It goes without saying that this periodic feedback will not create any additional lawyer job openings in the state. Plus, legal employers outside of Texas will not be looking at UNT Dallas Commode of Law grads.
Epic Flush of UNT Dallas COL: Back on July 6, 2010, Elie Mystal posted a hilarious entry labeled “How to Sell a Law School to Texans.” Check out this segment:
“Over the weekend, a tipster sent us the pitch North Texas is using on Texans who don’t know any better. Here’s the school’s headline:
Opening a public law school at the right time in the right place
You have got to be freaking kidding me…
As with the travesty at UMass, the North Texas argument is that North Texas somehow deserves a law school, not whether a new law school is needed (or whether its graduates will be able to find jobs). The website has five bullet points for why it’s a good idea to open a public law school in Dallas/Fort Worth. They are exceedingly stupid reasons:
* Since 1980, Texas’ population has grown from 14.3 million to an estimated 23.9 million in 2007, but no additional opportunities for legal education have been added.
I’ll stipulate that the demand for legal education is up if you stipulate that the supply of actual lawyers has totally saturated the market.
* The last public law school in Texas opened in 1967. Since 2000, the number of bachelor degrees is growing at an average rate of 2,400 per year.
Objection: relevance.” [Emphasis mine]
Anyone with an ounce of integrity and honesty realizes that there is no need for another law school in Texas.
The Lawyer Glut in Texas: Catherine Rampell’s piece, “The Lawyer Surplus, State by State,” was published by the New York Times Economix blog - on June 27, 2011.
According to Economic Modeling Specialists Inc., Texas had the SEVENTH MOST GLUTTED LAWYER JOB MARKET in the entire damn country. Does that sound as if the state needed another piece of garbage law school?!?!
Conclusion: The UniversiTTTTTTy of NorTTTTTTh TTTTTTexas aTTTTTT Dallas Commode of Law is a pathetic joke. As pointed out above, the Texas attorney job market is GLUTTED. There are already nine ABA-accredited diploma mills located in the state. Does anyone with a functioning brain stem believe that Texans are in need of legal representation from waterheads who couldn’t get into a real law school?!?! Furthermore, will those clients be able to pay for these garbage services?!
Posted by Nando at 8:44 AM
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
On November 11, 2013, the NaTTTional Juri$TTT published Alicia Albertson’s piece, “New England Law downsizing enrollment, faculty size.” Look at this excerpt:
“John O’Brien, previously the highest paid dean in the nation, will take a 25 percent pay cut this year, amid enrollment cutbacks and faculty buyouts at New England Law | Boston.
Its part of the school’s effort to stay ahead of the curve.
“Looking ahead, New England Law, like most law schools, anticipates fewer applications and smaller classes for the foreseeable future as a result of national trends,” said Patrick Collins, director of communications and marketing at the stand-alone law school. “The school is positioning itself for those realities.”
O’Brien’s salary will drop from $867,000 to around $650,000 a year. They faculty buyouts would go into effect for the 2014-2015 academic year.
“The Board of Trustees has proposed a generous incentive plan for voluntary separation by some faculty members, to take effect at the beginning of the new academic year,” Collins said. “The final number of participants in the plan will depend on faculty interest, enrollment projections, curricular needs and other institutional requirements.” [Emphasis mine]
You’re welcome, cockroaches! I love how the bitches and hags at this dump tried to spin this as a “voluntary” reduction in student enrollment. Yeah, sure it was their choice - and I decided not to ask Salma Hayek out last weekend.
Paul Campos reported on this development with his October 25, 2013 entry labeled “Law school dean threatens to summarily fire faculty who don’t accept buyouts or doubled teaching loads.” Read the following portion:
“Paul Caron quotes an anonymous source “close to the situation” as they say:
New England School of Law plans to eliminate 14 fulltime faculty positions by August 1, 2014. Depending on how one counts, this is about 35-40% of the regular faculty. . . . Faculty have been told by Dean John O’Brien that these 14 positions will be eliminated according to the School’s needs, regardless of tenure or seniority. An incentive plan has been offered to senior faculty and certain clinical faculty, but those who don’t take it have been threatened with termination. Their decisions must be final by the end of the Fall term. Those who still do not comply or were not offered the plan, were told that if they remain, their workload during the next academic year will move from 2 to as much as 4 courses per semester and that they will be required to be at their desks from 9 to 5 each day of the work week or an equivalent time period if they are teaching evening classes.
(I asked Caron how confident he is in the source’s reliability, and he replied “100%.”).” [Emphasis mine]
I am enjoying this development thoroughly.
A Severe Uppercut to the Swines' Snouts:
The Law School Truth Center blog went off on Pig O’Brien, in the October 28, 2013 post entitled “The Intolerable Acts of King O'Brien.” Check out this epic, hilarious opening:
“New England School of Law - close to the place where Britain really put the vicegrip on the American colonies' revolutionizing nutsack - is paying homage to that heritage by cracking the whip on its law professors:
35-40% cut in faculty.
Increased teaching loads to 8 classes per annum.
9-5 work schedule.
9-5 work schedule!!!!!!!
Intolerable. These are academic professionals.” [Emphasis mine]
I’m sure that the academic thieves at this notorious dung pit are sweating their little balls off over this fact. Remember, the vast majority of house cats work harder than these bastards.
Conclusion: John O’Brien is a reprehensible cockroach. As you can see, New England Law | Boston is rated as a FOURTH TIER PILE OF TRASH - by US “News” & World Report. Yes, that surely makes this sewer rat worth every penny of his $867K annual compensation, huh?!?! In the last analysis, this commode announcing that it is cutting staff is akin to a plumber slicing a turd in half. What’s the big deal? Well, according to USN&WR, the average law student indebtedness figure for the NELB Class of 2012 stood at a $132,632. In fact, 92% of this unfortunate cohort incurred debt for a TTTT law degree. At least, these academic dung beetles will not be FINANCIALLY RAPING as many students each year.
Posted by Nando at 7:52 AM
Thursday, November 14, 2013
Tuition: Full-time law students at Vanderbilt Univer$ity will be ass-raped to the tune of $47,746 in tuition - for the 2013-2014 school year. These sewer rats are essentially charging medical school rates. In fact, Vanderbilt Law charges a higher amount of tuition than the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, i.e. $44,030. Someone explain to me how in the hell the law school incurs higher costs than the medical school!
Estimated Cost of Attendance: According to this same document, living expenses will add another $21,198 to the gigantic tab. Loan fees account for an additional $1,158, while books and supplies amount to $1,842. Using the first tier toilet’s numbers, the total COA - for the 2013-2014 academic year - is $71,944.
At least, the pigs at Vanderbilt are up front about basing their living costs on a nine-month school year. Actual law students will require twelve months of expenses. In order to reach a more accurate figure, we need to prorate the following items: housing; miscellaneous; meals; and transportation. After doing so, the total estimated cost of attendance - for 2013-2014 - amounts to $79,010. Yes, the school truly cares about the students, right?!?!
Ranking: Bob Morse and US “News” & World Report lists Vanderbilt Univer$ity Law Sewer as the 15th best law school in the entire damn country. It only shares this distinction with one other ABA-accredited commode, i.e. the Univer$ity of Texa$ $chool of Law.
Employment Placement Statistics: The Class of 2012 had 196 members. Of this amount, three graduates did not supply their job status to the school. Ten JDs from this cohort were unemployed. Notice that the bitches and hags cannot add, as the column only amounts to 195. As such, the employment “placement” rate was 94.8 percent, i.e. 182/192.
Under Employment Types, you will notice that 52% of employed grads went to work for private law firms - of any size. From this segment, 37 percent were hired by firms of more than 500 attorneys. Basically, 18.24% of this class entered Biglaw, i.e. 94.8*0.52*0.37. Still like your odds, ass-clown?!?!
Average Law Student Indebtedness: USN&WR lists the average law student indebtedness - for those members of the Vanderbilt JD Class of 2012 who incurred debt for law school - as $124,493. Yet, “only” 76 percent of this school’s 2012 class took on such vile debt. Remember that this figure does not include undergraduate debt – and it also does not take accrued interest into account, while the student is enrolled.
Law Faculty and Administrator Salary Info: Let’s see how well the academic thieves are doing, in juxtaposition with their debt-strapped students. In order to do so, we will look at the 2012 Form 990. Head all the way down to pages 359 and 360 of this document, to find highest paid swine. Yes, you read that correctly. Can you believe this nonsense?!?! The following TOTAL COMPENSATION figures are for the tax year ending on June 30, 2012.
Nicholas Zippos “serves” as chancellor, but he is also listed as a “professor of law.” This rodent raked in $1,234,749 - with $1,007,183 coming in base salary. Meanwhile, David Williams II rolled around in $1,215,566 - for his dual role as vice chancellor for university affairs and athletics and “law professor.” Who says that “higher education” doesn’t pay off handsomely?!
Vandy Law Grads Waiting Tables: Check out this story, from Jennifer Brooks, which appeared in the February 16, 2010 edition of The Tennessean. It was entitled “Young law school grads face uncertain job market.” Read the excerpt below:
"After graduation, I think as many as 20 to 25 percent of my (classmates) were laid off. Either they had (job) offers taken back, or they worked a few months and then were laid off," said Sarah Laird, who graduated from Vanderbilt Law School in 2008, just as the economy was beginning to tank and her classmates were beginning to notice that lucrative job offers from big corporate law firms weren't rolling in as expected.
Laird landed a clerkship with the state court of criminal appeals. Some of her classmates weren't so fortunate.
"I know a couple that waited tables. I've even done that, when I needed some extra money," she said." [Emphasis mine]
Yes, what great outcomes for graduates of the co-15th greatest law school in the country, right?!?!
Vanderbilt Law Faculty Member Warns Students About Law School: Back on October 29, 2009, Herwig Schlunk published a draft law and economics paper entitled “Mamas Don’t Let You Babies Grow Up To Be…Lawyers.” In that document, Schlunk concluded that law school is a poor investment for MOST students. I remember citing to this paper during the early days of the scamblog movement. Now, look how far the message has spread since that time.
Conclusion: Vanderbilt University Law Sewer is ridiculously overpriced. REMEMBER, THE VANDERBILT LAW SCHOOL PIGS CHARGE MORE IN TUITION THAN THE MEDICAL SCHOOL!! You will essentially be required to take on an additional $135K-$170K in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt - for a chance to enter the legal “profession.” Also, it is significant that the two founders of Law School Transparency were former students at Vanderbilt Law. Plus, don’t forget the importance of VULS “professor” Herwig Schlunk’s law and economics paper. In sum, avoid this commode unless you come from a wealthy family and you don’t really need a career.
Posted by Nando at 7:00 AM