Tuesday, August 27, 2013
More Porky Pies from Don LeDuc:
The Lansing State Journal published Matthew Miller’s piece, “Cooley Law School weathering decline in enrollment,” on August 18, 2013. Take a look at this opening:
“From the outside, what was happening at Thomas M. Cooley Law School in the fall of 2010 looked like another chapter in the school’s explosive growth.
Enrollment topped 4,000 students, spread across four campuses in Michigan. The newest, in Ann Arbor, had opened the year before. And, though it’s a nonprofit, Cooley was pulling in money. It began that fiscal year with $90 million in net assets and closed it with $111 million.
In retrospect, it was a high-water mark. Students had flocked to law schools after the economic meltdown of 2008. Cooley’s leaders didn’t pass on the opportunity.
Enrollment has fallen sharply since. Cooley had 3,219 students last fall, even after the opening of a fifth campus near Tampa, Fla. Don LeDuc, Cooley’s president and dean, said the entering class this fall will be “significantly smaller” than the previous year. As for the money, he calls it a nest egg. “Our model has basically been the grasshopper and the ants from your fables,” LeDuc said. “We set aside a fair amount of money to weather what we thought the storm would be. Our only concern is how long this lasts.” [Emphasis mine]
For $ome rea$on, Cockroach Don LeDuc did not mention his concern for his students or their job prospects. He must have forgot to do so, right?!?! Later on, the author wrote:
“Cooley hasn’t cut faculty positions like some other schools, but it has allowed vacancies to remain unfilled, LeDuc said.
This fall, it will raise tuition by 9 percent for first-year students, bringing the cost of the first 30 credits to $43,500, and by 8 percent for everyone else.
It hasn’t lowered its admission standards, LeDuc said. The median LSAT score of its entering class slipped from 146 two years ago to 145 last year, but that reflects a reduction in the number of higher-scoring applicants rather than a drop in the school’s minimum requirements for admission, he said. But LeDuc doesn’t see a drop in minimum requirements as out of the question.
“Sooner or later you’ve got to make a choice,” he said, “because you need enough revenue to cover what your expenses are.” [Emphasis mine]
Bitch, you have no admi$$ion$ standards. Hell, your median LSAT score for your entering class is 145!!
Pathetic 2013 LSAT and UGPA 25th-75th Percentile Figures:
According to the Top Law Schools listing above, an LSAT score of 142 would place an applicant in the 25th percentile for the 2013 class entering at TTTThoma$ M. Cooley Law Sewer! A 151 on the LSAT would put you at the 75th percentile for this rat-hole. It’s nice to see that an ABA-accredited dung heap has such stringent admi$$ion$ “standards,” huh?!?!
Based on this same listing, a UGPA of 2.57 was good enough for the 25th percentile at TTTT Cooley. Keep in mind that these grades include people who majored in Political “Science,” Psychology, English Literature, American History, etc. - at various college$ and univer$itie$. An undergraduate GPA of 3.36 would set you firmly in the 75th percentile at this pile of excrement.
A Four Year College Degree Not Necessary for Admission to Cooley!:
Check out this filth, from the fourth tier trash pit:
“Applying Without a Bachelor's Degree
Please note: Some state bars require a bachelor's degree; however, the State Bar of Michigan does not. Please check the educational requirements of the bar in the state in which you plan to practice law.
Most Cooley students have a bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university. Yet, under court rules adopted by the Michigan Supreme Court, an applicant may also attend if the student has completed at least 60 semester hours or 90 quarter hours either toward an undergraduate degree from an accredited school or from an accredited junior or community college.
Cooley Law School welcomes inquiries from individuals with associate's degrees or 60 to 90 credits at a four-year institution.” [Emphasis mine]
At what point will these hags start accepting students armed with nothing more than a high school diploma or GED?!?! Their mothers must be very proud. You would think that a supposed “institution of higher learning” would be embarrassed to post this garbage.
Pig LeDuc’s Compensation as Cooley Dean:
According to the 2011 Form 990 for Thomas M. Cooley Law School, i.e Employer ID No. 38-1988915, Don LeDuc raked in $605,507 in TOTAL COMPENSATION for the tax year ending August 31, 2011. At those sums, the Michigan mustached dung beetle will do and say/hiss anything to keep the gravy train of federally-backed student loans rolling along.
Conclusion: The pigs, rats and cockroaches at this diploma mill DO NOT GIVE ONE DAMN ABOUT YOU, the student. In their eyes, YOU are simply a bag of money. They need asses in seats, preferably those attached to people with small brains. Remember, the admi$$ion$ “standards” at this place essentially amount to an open enrollment policy - since anyone who really wants to go to law school can gain admission to this putrid dump. Yet, LeDuc has not ruled out decreasing minimum requirements. If the ABA cared about its own reputation, then the dolts would strip this pile of waste of its accreditation.
Posted by Nando at 6:19 AM
Thursday, August 22, 2013
Tuition: In-state law students – attending on a full-time basis – will be charged $20,770 in tuition, for the 2013-2014 school year. Non-resident, full-time law students will be bent over a coffee table, at a cost of $34,840 – for 2013-2014. It’s nice to see a public toilet taking such an intere$t in their pupils, huh?!
Ranking: According to US “News” & World Report, the University of Alabama Sewer of Law is the 21st most prestigious law school in the entire nation. It even shares this designation with George Washington University, which MUST make it a great in$titution, right?!?! You might think that is impressive, but keep in mind that this is definitely a regional school – at best. Try landing a decent attorney position outside of the South, with a degree from this commode.
Employment Placement Data: Let’s take a look at the Employment Summary report for the Alabama JD Class of 2012. Under Employment Status, you will note that the school claims a 94% “placement rate” within nine months of graduation, i.e. 158/168. Then again, the school did not know the job status for four members of this cohort. When JDs get jobs, they typically cannot wait to report that information. If we use the entire class, then the placement rate falls to 91.9 percent, i.e. 158/172. You will also see that the public toilet hired three members of the Class of 2012 in law school or university funded positions. Those posts are listed as full-time, long term.
Scroll down to the section labeled Employment Type. A total of 80 graduates ended up working in private law firms. This number includes the following: 12 desperate solos; 34 people working in firms of 2-10 lawyers; and 12 more employed by offices of 11-25 attorneys. In stark contrast, only damn member of this class found work in a firm of more than 500 lawyers. Do you still like YOUR odds, lemming?!?!
Average Law Student Indebtedness: US “News” lists the average law student indebtedness - for those members of the University of Alabama JD Class of 2012 who incurred debt for law school - as $67,611. In fact, 79 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.
Alabama’s Long-Time Law Dean Leaves…for InfiLaw:
Paul Campos authored a Lawyers, Guns & Money blog entry entitled “Does your conscience bother you?” - back on July 6, 2013. Check out the segment below:
“[I]t ought to tell us something when the University of Alabama announced last week that Kenneth Randall, who had been dean of the university’s law school for 20 years, was “retiring” effective immediately, to enter what the university’s president characterized demurely as “the private sector.”
“The private sector” turns out to be . . . well let’s allow ex-Dean Randall to speak for himself:
We all are still working on the margins of traditional education with distance ed; it is high time to create economies of scale industry-wide; to bring law to non-lawyers; to create hybrid models of brick-and-mortar and technology-based programs; to train lawyers to deliver legal services in the new technology-based ways clients demand; and to train law students for jobs that don’t require a bar license. We need inclusive education, that breaks down geographical and other boundaries.
The InfiLaw System offered a special opportunity, supporting me to lead a new venture, InfiLaw Ventures, both to create new content, and to deliver existing content in ways that expand markets and serve student learners who otherwise might be left out of education….We will joint venture with schools nationally and internationally. I’ve been involved in traditional legal education. But the ABA rules on distance education need updating. We need the accreditors and educators and innovators coming together to meet the new realities of legal education.” [Emphasis mine]
It's obvious that Kenneth Randall is leaving for browner pastures - unless the pigs at InfiLaw are tossing more green in his direction. As Elie Mystal pointed out, under Randall, the public commode went from 38th greatest - in 2010 - to the 21st most phenomenal law school in the United States. The rat had also been dean for 20 years. According to his old school bio, the academic thief holds four law degrees! I’m sure that the InfiLaw excrement piles will see their ranking soar.
Do You Enjoy Toilet Water?:
This past Spring, the Alabama State Bar published a report labeled “Thinking Of Going To Law School?” Head down to the subheading Early Hires - 0-3 Months:
“For those who found employment within 3 months after admission, the largest group (43.3%) found it in the private practice setting of firms having 1 to 5 lawyers. This result is not surprising, since we know that approximately two-thirds of Alabama lawyers practice in the 1 to 5 lawyer setting.” [Emphasis mine]
Those who took more than one year to find a job ended up working in such firms at an even higher rate. The employment statistics from the University of Alabama SOL Class of 2012 reflect this reality, as well. Have fun fighting established law firms - and locally known attorneys - for family law and DUI cases. Make sure to have some decent start up money, if you take this TTT route.
Conclusion: You may think that an additional $70K in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt is a small price to pay for a chance to be admitted to this garbage “profession.” However, keep in mind that the USN&WR figure cited above does not include interest that accrues while you are enrolled in this advanced Humanities program. Do you think that you can make good money as a small town lawyer, in a boutique firm, in an area already overrun with such attorneys? If you have a decent job, with a chance for advancement, be smart - and stick to that position.
Posted by Nando at 6:14 AM
Sunday, August 18, 2013
Welcome to the Barbecue Pit, Filthy Porker:
On August 12, 2013, the Wall Street Journal published Jennifer Smith’s piece, “Law-School Professors Face Less Job Security.” Look at this opening:
“The main body that accredits U.S. law schools is moving to reduce job protections for law professors, who have long enjoyed the security of academic tenure.
The shift comes at a time of plunging student enrollment, and could make it easier for law schools to trim the ranks of full-time faculty, whose salaries consume a considerable share of tuition dollars.
Some law schools that are struggling to balance their budgets have dismissed administrative staff in recent months. Others are offering buyouts to reduce the number of tenured professors or are leaving empty posts unfilled.” [Emphasis mine]
These academic thieves and hustlers never gave a damn about their students or recent graduates. They only cared about putting asses in seats. The swine continued to raise tuition to ridiculous levels, when they KNEW that the overall U.S. job market was GLUTTED and shrinking. Now, these pigs are starting to feel the effects of their rampant, unchecked greed.
Take note of the following admission, later on in the article:
"Law professors and law deans are paid too much," said Kent Syverud, dean of Washington University School of Law in St. Louis, told the ABA's task force on the future of legal education. "Either we have to be paid less, or we have to do more…. The whole problem of costs probably would go away if our salaries were halved." [Emphasis mine]
This statement is from one of the scam participants. It did not come from an angry scam-blogger or a neutral observer. The rat bastards are finally publicly recognizing the truth.
On August 12, 2013, Sam Glover authored a stellar blog entry labeled “Law School Classes Shrinking, Law Professors Losing Job Security.” Check out this opening:
“For a decade, law schools have been jacking up tuition, class sizes, professors’ salaries, and employment numbers, despite the fact that the legal market has been in a slide, if not a freefall, for much of that time. Everyone knew it was unsustainable, but law schools were either oblivious or uncaring.
Finally, the bubble has burst. The pool of applicants to law school is shrinking drastically, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune. The University of St. Thomas School of Law, for example, received “59 percent fewer applications this year than in 2010.”
Law school is no longer the default decision it used to be for smart college graduates who aren’t sure where to go next, said James Leipold, executive director of the National Association for Law Placement.” [Emphasis mine]
Hell, those with the highest LSAT scores are choosing not to apply to law school at a significantly higher rate than those who scored much lower on the exam. The smarter kids have figured out that, for most people, law school is a losing game.
Glover then states the following:
“In fact, law schools aren’t waiting around for the ABA. Confronted with plunging applicant pools, they are offering buyouts and leaving empty positions unfilled.” [Emphasis mine]
Karen Sloan’s article, “ABA Panel Favors Dropping Law School Tenure Requirement,” appeared in the August 12, 2013 edition of the National Law Journal. Take a look at this segment:
“So long, tenure.
The American Bar Association’s Council of the Section of the Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar on Friday tentatively embraced two plans that would eliminate tenure as an accreditation requirement…
Many council members argued that the existing tenure requirement for doctrinal faculty had driven up the cost of legal education and tied the hands of administrators seeking new ways of running law schools or to oust underperforming professors.
“The biggest financial issues we have right now are our fixed costs, and our fixed costs come from tenured, salaried professors,” said council member Maureen O’Rourke, dean of Boston University Law School. “The solution is not to give everyone tenure, but to give no one tenure. Frankly, we don’t need 200 law schools that look like Harvard Law School and value the same things as Harvard Law School. Somewhere down the line, the students got lost.” [Emphasis mine]
Univer$itie$ and college$ figured this scheme out long ago. As reported in the New York Times by Christopher Shea, back on September 3, 2010: “Nearly two-thirds of all college teachers are non-tenure-track adjuncts.” Apparently, it took longer, i.e. until it was inevitable, for the law school swine to cut back on faculty pay and security.
Conclusion: I understand that most of the Boomer cockroach “law professors” and administrators will end up cashing out and enjoying an early, forced retirement. At least, those pieces of trash will no longer collect $200K+ annual salaries – for merely reciting their same old notes about archaic, parsed cases. You “educator” pigs reap what you sow. Maybe you hags should “Get over it and move to Nebraska!”
In the final analysis, you whiny dung beetles are not entitled to tenure. “Academic freedom” is a silly joke. You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You are as expendable as the rest of us. Many of you have claimed that you could earn more in private practice. Well, now you have your chance to prove that assertion. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature think that cash-strapped government agencies and law firms will be looking to hire 60 year old academic hacks/ass-clowns who have written numerous law review articles about esoteric topics?!?!
Posted by Nando at 5:32 AM
Monday, August 12, 2013
Dear Misguided Fool,
You will soon begin orientation at your particular law school. I am sure that you felt proud, when you received your acceptance letter. At this point, you likely still view this as some great accomplishment. Hell, beating your brother in law or nephew at chess is a bigger feat.
ABA Diploma Mills Are Much Less Selective Today:
Due to the continuing decline in the number of applications, law school pigs have lowered their already weak-ass “standards” – in order to keep up enrollment figures. On July 31, 2013, Paul Campos published an excellent blog entry entitled “Law school in America moves toward an open admissions policy.” Check out this killer opening:
“Here is the percentage of law school applicants who were admitted, over the last decade, to at least one ABA-accredited law school to which they applied, by year:
2013: 80% (projected)
The 2013 projection is based on the relation between the total number of applicants in this cycle and the total number of matriculants in the 2013 class, assuming an 8% reduction in the total size of the national law school class relative to 2012.” [Emphasis mine]
In sum, a typical law school applicant seeking to enroll in Fall 2013 had a 43.88% higher chance of getting accepted to at least one ABA-accredited dung pit than someone seeking to enter law school in Autumn 2004, i.e. (80-55.6/55.6)*100. The figures above do not even take into account the fact that the sharpest decline in applications comes from those with the highest LSAT scores! Do you still feel that you are special, Lemming?!?!
The Glutted, Shrinking U.S. Lawyer Job Market:
According to the NALP Class of 2012 National Summary Report, 84.7 percent of this massive cohort was employed within nine months of graduation. Of course, this figure includes non-law positions, attorney jobs, part-time and full-time work, plus long term and temporary posts.
Overall, there were 46,364 members of the JD Class of 2012 – competing for a total of 28,567 jobs labeled “bar passage required.” Keep in mind that not all of those positions were traditional attorney openings. Note that only 45,434 graduates had their info sent to NALP. Using the entire class size, a mere 61.6% of all JDs ended up finding such legal work, i.e. 28,567/46,364. However, this figure jumps all the way up to 64.4 percent, when relying on those for whom employment status was known, i.e. 28,567/44,339.
Gambling With Your Future:
The New Republic published senior editor Noam Schieber's brilliant piece, headlined “The Last Days of Biglaw,” on July 21, 2013. Take a look at the stinging excerpt below:
“Stable” is not the way anyone would describe a legal career today. In the past decade, twelve major firms with more than 1,000 partners between them have collapsed entirely. The surviving lawyers live in fear of suffering a similar fate, driving them to ever-more humiliating lengths to edge out rivals for business. “They were cold-calling,” says the lawyer whose firm once turned down no-name clients. And the competition isn’t just external. Partners routinely make pitches behind the backs of colleagues with ties to a client. They hoard work for themselves even when it requires the expertise of a fellow partner. They seize credit for business that younger colleagues bring in.
And then there are the indignities inflicted on new lawyers, known as associates. The odds are increasingly long that a recent law-school grad will find a job. Five years ago, during a recession, American law schools produced 43,600 graduates and 75 percent had positions as lawyers within nine months. Last year, the numbers were 46,500 and 64 percent. In addition to the emotional toll unemployment exacts, it is often financially ruinous. The average law student graduates $100,000 in debt.
Meanwhile, those lucky enough to have a job are constantly reminded of their expendability.” [Emphasis mine]
By the way, lemming: Schieber is a Rhodes Scholar who earned a Master’s degree in economics from Oxford University. Do you think - for one moment - that YOU have a better understanding of job markets than this man?!?! When Biglaw opportunities are limited, graduates from top-ranked law schools end up taking jobs that traditionally went to second tier grads, i.e. public interest, legal aid, etc.
Conclusion: The following facts are irrefutable: (a) the U.S. attorney job market is GLUTTED, throughout the country; (b) automation, outsourcing, and globalization keep growing in scope; (c) law school tuition continues to SKYROCKET; and (d) recent JDs are graduating with mountains of NON-DISCHARGABLE debt.
Based on increasing tuition rates, current victims can expect to walk away owing even larger sums of student loans. Taken together, these facts should hit your gray matter with force. People attend “professional” school, because they want to enter a secure career – and make a solid living. Why the hell else would one willingly incur $120K-190K in total student debt? YOU need to view law school SOLELY as a financial decision, because it will affect you for several decades – if not the rest of your life. The “professors” and administrators DO NOT GIVE ONE DAMN about you or your future. In stark contrast, they are paid up front, in full – while you are left holding the bag. They need to keep getting asses in seats, in order to get their filthy hooves and paws on those federally-backed, student loan dollars.
Posted by Nando at 8:01 AM
Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Disgraceful Filth: ABA Task Force Cockroaches Issue 34 Sheets of Toilet Paper, Regarding the Pathetic State of U.S. “Legal Education”
On Thursday, August 1, 2013, the bitches and hags on the ABA Task Force on the Future of “Legal Education” released a “working paper” on the situation. On pages 2, 3, and 23, these tools cried about having only had 12 months to work on this project. At any rate, the portion below is about the only segment devoid of meaningless platitudes, laughable reforms, and $elf-$erving nonsense:
“F. Law Related Services and Employment
1. Structural Changes in the Legal Employment Market. The economy of law related services and the related employment market have changed sharply over the past five years. This has affected traditional legal services, where hiring decreased, particularly for new lawyers in large firms and (because of reduced revenues) lawyers in government practice. The pace of structural changes that were already under way (for example, use of contract labor and increased reliance on technology to increase productivity) accelerated. These changes have had a substantial impact on employment opportunities for new and recent law school graduates.
Moreover, there are evident structural changes that reflect increasing price sensitivity by users of legal services, with resulting price competition and changes in the mode of delivery. The developments are likely to continue, with continuing impact on lawyer employment. It seems probable that this change in employment for lawyers is not just a passing phenomenon caused by the Great Recession and must be addressed systematically. The profession is also experiencing a shift in demand from bespoke representation of clients to something that looks more like the commoditization of legal services (i.e., Legal Zoom).
The American market for legal education and legal services is also increasingly affected by forces of globalization. Multiple entities in the ABA and the profession are engaged in evaluating these trends and making recommendations about them. The Task Force has elected not to reproduce those efforts, but does believe that its recommendations are generally consistent with other work under way to address these trends. [Emphasis mine]
Thanks for stating the obvious, douche-bags. Apparently, it only took these bastards a full year to reach this consensus. Then again, automation, outsourcing and globalization WILL persist - and increase in scope.
Back to the ABA Outsourcing Opinion:
Keep in mind that the ABA Standing Committee on “Ethics and Professional Responsibility” issued “Ethics” Opinion 08-451, back on August 5, 2008. This provided the cartel’s stamp of approval on U.S. law firms’ hiring of foreign lawyers and non-attorneys, for the purpose of engaging in American legal discovery. The American Bar Association pigs sure are looking out for the little guy, huh?!?!
On August 4, 2013, criminal defense lawyer Scott H. Greenfield published a blog article simply titled “The ABA Working Paper on the Future of Legal Education.” Check out this stinging portion:
“A few things are clear from the content, and lack of content, in the ABA working paper. The “lost generation,” the kids who came out of law school over the past few years and found themselves saddled with huge debt and no jobs, are screwed. There is nothing in there for them.
The task force adopts the facile position that it’s counterproductive to moralize or blame, which will no doubt be applauded by those who deserve blame, including the ABA. Except the failure to do so avoids the hard task of understanding responsibility, cause and effect and bearing the consequences of the past.
There are parties at fault, and without calling them out for their fault, they get to enjoy the benefits of their selfishness and greed without consequence, as if it never happened. It happened. There is pain to be endured, and it should be meted out according to fault. That won’t happen. And with no price to be paid, there is no reason to suspect the same parties won’t try to spin this to their advantage again.
One of the most obvious, and critical failings, that the ABA has cranked out more lawyers than society can support, is ignored through some glib “public benefit” language, but while the concept sounds lovely and more than a little Utopian, it fails to deal with the issue of how they’re supposed to eat. It’s a glaring hole.” [Emphasis mine]
Greenfield understands that people need to be held accountable. Hell, according to the July 28, 2013 edition of CBS’ 60 Minutes segment on Yale University’s Infant Cognition Lab, babies as young as six months old also have a highly-developed sense of justice and morality. Of course, the ABA dung beetles and "law professors" would prefer to be held blameless - just as convicted child predators would rather not have their names and addresses placed on sex offender lists.
Conclusion: On page 30, the cockroaches on this American Bar Association panel merely suggest the formation of yet another ABA task force or commission to study this issue further. Yes, that will lead to structural change and results, right?!?! In the last analysis, “law professors” and the ABA swine are too $elf-entrenched to alter the status quo. This garbage paper was issued, in order to give the appearance of doing something about the crumbling U.S. lawyer job market and skyrocketing tuition.
Law school applications are steadily decreasing, and enrollment at most ABA-accredited diploma mills is declining – even though the admi$$ion$ jackals are becoming less selective. Solid, truthful information about the dwindling U.S. attorney job market, insane tuition costs, and soul-crushing levels of NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt is widely available now. You’re welcome, scammers. We cannot expect a solution from the very criminals who are financially ruining legions each year, nor can we anticipate the political branches doing anything significant. Those puppets simply do not have the balls or guts to try and change the $y$tem. The key is for consumers to view law school PRIMARILY as a financial decision.
Posted by Nando at 6:52 AM
Friday, August 2, 2013
Crack Open a Window: Fourth Tier Trash Pit Charleston School of Law Enters Management Agreement with InfiLaw
On July 25, 2013, the Post and Courier published Diane Knich’s piece entitled “Charleston School of Law enters into management services agreement; is sale next?” Look at this opening:
“The Charleston School of Law has entered into a management services agreement with InfiLaw System, an arrangement that sometimes can be the first step in a sale.
InfiLaw currently owns three other law schools: Charlotte School of Law, Florida Coastal School of Law and Phoenix School of Law.
The Charleston School of Law on Thursday evening released a statement about the plan, about which speculation had been swirling all day in the local legal community.
But the release did not describe what the law school’s future might look like, and spokesman Andy Brack said he could not elaborate due to regulatory reasons.” [Emphasis mine]
A few paragraphs later, the author continued:
“According to the release, the “alliance” with InfiLaw would give the school “access to pioneering programs and tools that will help it continue to provide students with excellence in teaching, strong faculty relationships, as well as opportunities for public service and community involvement.” Alex Sanders, one of the founders of the school, said that as of two days ago he no longer is chairman of the board, a member of its board or a co-owner of the school.
He doesn’t know specifically what is happening there or whether the school ultimately will be sold. But, he said, “to sell a law school is a complicated thing. It could take months or years. It’s not like selling a loaf of bread.” [Emphasis mine]
Yes, this is the true hallmark of an elite and prestigious “institution of higher education,” right?!?! Hell, the sewer rats ought to throw in a few cases of cheap beer – in order to sweeten the deal.
CharlesTTTTon Law Pigs Have Entertained Offers for Years:
The Charleston City Paper printed an article from Paul Bowers, under the headline “Charleston School of Law has been in contact with InfiLaw for years” – in its July 31, 2013 edition. Review the revealing portion below:
“Hundreds of students and alumni showed up to Tuesday night's meeting, which was held in the Charleston Music Hall and included a panel of school administrators and InfiLaw leaders.
What the audience did learn was that the leadership of the Charleston School of Law had already fielded some offers from other companies. Judge Robert S. Carr, a founding member of the school's board of directors, said that two private colleges had approached the board over the past five years about making "arrangements," but the deals fell through. Carr said the school also tried to become a nonprofit institution, but that plan also fell through. When a student criticized Carr and the directors for moving part of the school's base and structure to Florida, Carr responded that the board had looked for other options.
"First of all, my obligation is to the students," Carr said. "My obligation is to the faculty and staff. My obligation is to the business partners. The community comes fourth. We are trying to preserve the school community. What good would it do the community for this school to go away, to not exist?" [Emphasis mine]
Notice how Cockroach Robert Carr does not mention how pumping out several dozens of financially ruined law grads each year impacts the community. Later on, Bowers reported:
“InfiLaw's reputation precedes it. While its three schools boast high employment rates for graduates, its admissions are also markedly less selective. According to lawschoolnumbers.com, Charleston School of Law accepted 50 percent of applicants for the Class of 2017, compared to 67 percent at Florida Coastal, 69 percent at Charlotte, and 73 percent at Phoenix.
InfiLaw schools have some critics from within their own ranks, too. At Phoenix School of Law, two former professors are suing the school after the administration allegedly announced a plan to eliminate tenure, change the curriculum, and require students to meet with an administrator before transferring to other schools.” [Emphasis mine]
Who the hell wouldn’t want to join with such a filthy, putrid, for-profit garbage “consortium”?!?! Keep in mind that Law School Numbers also counts non-legal positions, part-time jobs, and temporary work – when publishing a commode’s employment “placement” rate.
Elie Mystal posted a July 26, 2013 entry labeled “I Bet You Thought Going To Charleston Law Was Already Rock Bottom.” Check out this sharp right uppercut:
“I imagine that students of the Charleston School of Law woke up this morning feeling a bit like exotic dancers who just found out that their strip joint was being sold to a whorehouse.
Charleston School of Law (CSOL) was already a pretty weak law school, charging $38,000 a year despite being unranked by U.S. News. Its employment stats and bar passage rates are often embarrassing. It’s “accredited” by the ABA because, well, the ABA will rubber-stamp institutions like this.
But yesterday the school announced that it was entering a “management services agreement” with a for-profit company, Infilaw Inc. Infilaw has not covered itself in glory. It owns Charlotte School of Law, Florida Coastal School of Law, and Phoenix School of Law. So to call Infilaw a “diploma mill” is being exceedingly kind to Infilaw.” [Emphasis mine]
Conclusion: The law school pigs are desperate to stay in business. THEY DO NOT GIVE ONE DAMN about the students or recent graduates. Their sole concern is to keep the gravy train of student loan money rolling along. In order to accomplish that goal, they need to get asses in seats. Due to fewer applications, the bastards see that they need to merge with existing law schools, sell out to for-profit trash pits, or partner with universities that do not currently have an ABA-accredited dung heap. Does anyone with an IQ above room temperature still view law school as anything more than a jobs program for failed attorneys known as "professors"?!
Posted by Nando at 6:51 AM