Saturday, January 9, 2016

No Surprise: Fourth Tier Thomas Jefferson Sewer of Law Plays the Employment Placement Game

AP Skewers the Pigs: On December 6, 2015, US “News” & World Report republished a Sudhim Thanawala article for the Associated Press under the headline “Lawsuits part of call for greater transparency about value of law school education.” Look at this opening:

“Nikki Nguyen left a $50,000-a-year job at Boeing Co. in 2006 to pursue a law degree at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, her sister's successful career as a corporate attorney providing a glimpse of the possibilities she imagined ahead of her. 

Instead, she struggled for more than a year to find a job after she graduated and watched her student loan debt of over $180,000 balloon. 

Nguyen, 34, is among 12 former Thomas Jefferson students who are suing the university in a California court, accusing it of inflating its graduates' employment figures and salaries to attract students. 

"They weren't transparent," said Nguyen, whose case is scheduled to go to trial in March. 

"People who have a dream of law school should go into it with their eyes wide open." An attorney for Thomas Jefferson, Michael Sullivan, denied the allegations and said the school was following procedures set by the American Bar Association that have since changed.” [Emphasis mine]

It’s funny how bitches and hags at ABA-accredited dung heaps like to say “Welcome to the profession,” in their acceptance letters and emails to lemmings. Then during OrienTTTaTTTion, the swine administrators and “professors” CLEARLY tell their students to start “Thinking of yourselves as lawyers, from this day forward.” After first semester, it becomes patently clear that the cockroaches only care about those in the top decile of the class. When you graduate without a decent job – due to receiving a law degree from a stench pit – then you are suddenly dismissed as “a lazy, entitled bastard.”

Skip two paragraphs down:

“Thomas Jefferson reported post-graduation employment figures that exceeded 70 percent and topped 90 percent in 2010, but did not disclose that those figures included part-time and non-legal work such as a pool cleaner and a sales clerk at Victoria's Secret and were based on a small sample of graduates, according to Nguyen's lawsuit and her attorney, Brian Procel. The lawsuit further alleges that the school routinely reported unemployed students as employed and shredded surveys and other documents that reflected a more accurate employment picture. 

Thomas Jefferson responded in court documents that the students ignored additional available employment data. Sullivan said there is "no evidence that demonstrates any effort on the part of the school to misrepresent the post-graduate employment numbers." [Emphasis mine]

These academic sociopaths and thieves never take any responsibility for their selfish, sickening actions. What beacons of integrity, huh?!?!

More TTTT News Regarding TJ$L: On December 21, 2015, Yahoo Finance re-posted a BusinessInsider piece from Abby Jackson. It was entitled “A guy with $170,000 in student loans who can't find a job in the legal profession is suing his law school and working full time for Uber.” Read the portion below:

“[Clark] Moffatt is one of 12 former TJSL students now suing the law school, which they claim intentionally inflated postgraduation employment figures and salaries in order to lure applicants. 

Four former students filed a lawsuit against the school in 2011, and Clark is one of another eight plaintiffs who filed separate suits against the school in 2014. The case filed in 2011 is scheduled to go to trial in early 2016. 

The school is accused of reporting postgraduation employment figures that topped 90% in 2010 but neglecting to disclose that the figures included part-time work, such as pool cleaner and Victoria’s Secret sales clerk, the Associated Press reported this month, citing the suit and an attorney for the graduates. 

“Mark Twain once said, ‘There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics.’ This case covers all three,” stated a recent filing in the case that was originally filed in 2011.

For its part, TJSL said in a court filing the year after the 2011 suit was filed that “at all times, TJSL calculated its employment statistics in full compliance with the [American Bar Association’s] reporting guidelines for law schools and the requirements of US News.” [Emphasis mine]

Does anyone else feel the need to puke, when they see the law school pigs hide behind this weak-ass excuse, “We were in full compliance with ABA requirements”? This is the academic version of the Nuremberg Defense. You see scum, across all industries, adopt the same tactic after the fact – as if this somehow makes their conduct acceptable or just.

Conclusion: It is beyond sad that morons keep applying to, and enrolling in, this certified pile of dog excrement. Now, you understand why paint cans prominently feature warning labels. These waterheads need to be protected against themselves. Every scam needs willing victims, as well as the ignorant ones. However, this does not absolve the filthy swine who run these “institutions of higher learning” – for their disgusting, deplorable actions. In the end, these pieces of garbage only care about one thing – getting their hands on big-ass bags of federal student loan money. They do not even give a damn about the supposed “profession.” Which means they couldn’t care less about YOU, the student and recent graduate. Wise up, fools. Forget law school and avoid the plunge to financial ruin.


  1. Oh, come on, Nguyen. Admit that you never considered your toilet's employment data when you decided to go there. The key factor in your decision was your sister's successful career in corporate law. Visions of sugar-plums danced in your head, and you didn't bother to check the facts (however distorted by the law-school scamsters) before signing up with the Thomas Jefferson Toilet of Law. I'm right, am I not?

    For that matter, I'm willing to bet that you don't even care about law, except as a vehicle for big money.

    Almost certainly you're a dumb bunny who couldn't get into any law school other than a few such as Cooley, Appalachian, and Indiana Tech that don't offer beaches and fun in the sun. And that's why you went to Thomas Jefferson. You felt entitled to big money just for getting a crumby degree from one of the foulest of the toilets. Am I right?

    As for your sister, she graduated years ago and went to a school a damn sight more respectable than Thomas Jefferson, didn't she? No matter: you still had great expectations, and you would have gone to Thomas Jefferson even if the facts had been written on the front door in neon lights.

    You cannot prove reasonable reliance on Thomas Jefferson's data (however distorted they may be), because you did not seriously consider them.

    You'll lose your lawsuit, as well you should. Grow the hell up.

    1. And I might add, that she left a 50K job at Boeing. What was she, a mail-room clerk? That's very low pay for a college graduate working at Boeing or in California for that matter. In Illinois or Indiana that might be an above average wage for a entry level college graduate...

      I don't think Reliance is the issue here. It is a simple fraud case...No question, TJLS misrepresented the data and puffed things, there are just no damages.

    2. Reliance is an element of civil fraud, so, yes, it is in issue.

    3. I agree with this. They always take the dumbest and worst examples.

      The law school scam isn't that people at the absolute worse law schools can't get Big Law/high level high wage corporate law jobs.

      The scam is that people from mediocre law schools can't even get $50k a year district attorney or government position jobs. The field is so absolutely glutted that those positions are extremely competitive and then have zero job security or wage growth.

      Everyone knew Big Law wasn't in the cards if you didn't go to a T8 and placed top half, ideally HYS, but the thought was going to a school ranked in the 60s and above would at least get you a gig as a prosecutor or something.

      The media never wants to admit to that.

      I've done doc review sitting next to dudes with STEM degrees that used to run their own firms and have had extremely impressive backgrounds. Some were high level in pharma, engineering and many other amazing positions. yet there they are, doing $30/hr doc review garbage because their degrees and past experience are worthless in a glutted field.

      Student loans should only be available to the top 8 or so law schools. No public student loans for anybody else, with full bankruptcy protection on any and all private loans. This would force price discovery, and my guess is most of these law schools close down as they just aren't justifiable.

      And what schools remain, there might at least be SOME selectivity, certainly someone that can only get into Thomas Jefferson, without scholarship no less, has no business being an advocate for anyone. I would say 165 on the LSAT is a minimum for law school.

    4. I agree that the core of the scam is the disproportion between results and costs for people who do respectably well at respectable (or until recent years respectable) law schools. The large number of toilets charging comparable rates is only one of the stinkier manifestations of the scam.

      If Thomas Jefferson should be held liable, it is for admitting someone who is too goddamn stupid to make a decision involving $180k+ of non-dischargeable debt.

      Many people here know something about my story. I have never framed myself as a victim of the law-school scam or accused my law school (one of the élite, completely out of the league of Thomas Jefferson & Co.) of duping me. My complaint mainly targets the hiring practices of the legal "profession". I did turn my mind to the cost of law school, and even when I was applying it was plain to me that most law schools were unjustifiably expensive. (A few years later, I concluded that more than 90% of law schools are fourth-tier toilets that no one should attend.)

      I have yet to see a plaintiff who actually was defrauded by a law school. In every scam-related case that I have read, the plaintiffs were just trying to blame their law schools for their poor outcomes. Let's face it: lemmings too are very much part of the law-school scam, owing mainly to their contemptible sense of entitlement and unwillingness to take responsibility for their own dumb decisions.

      I like your suggestion of 165 as the threshold for admissibility to law school. For years I have generously suggested 160, which is the 80th percentile. Even if we shaded it to 155 (the 64th percentile), scores of law schools would have to close. That would be a good start, and it would restore some of the sense that lawyers should be intelligent people.

    5. Have to agree with 2:09. The really sad part of the scam is that bright kids, 160-170 LSAT scores, just shy of eligibility for elite schools, waste their time at Tier 1 trap schools and even some strong regional 2nd tier schools. These kids could have successful careers in management, engineering, medicine etc. but get suckered into law. Not in the top 25 % at a Tier 1 trap like Georgetown or Vanderbilt--forget about it. Not in the top 10-15% anywhere else in Tier 2--Ditto. Even the lucky ones who make big law are usually washed out in 5 years.
      Imagine any other consumer product with a 75-90% failure rate.

    6. Don't disagree with any of this, but it would be interesting if this case actually goes to trial.

    7. To Old Guy at 3:26--

      Yes, 165 would make a good threshold for admission to law school. Since the law schools have a huge financial interest in not implementing such a standard, it's up to individuals and their social networks to implement it.

      Let's convince every student with an LSAT less than 165 not to attend law school. I've actually seen heroic but reasonable attempts in the Top Law Schools forums to do just that.

    8. Steer clear of Georgetown and Vanderbilt. Not even half of the class ends up in Big Law or a federal clerkship—the sorts of jobs with some hope of paying enough to cover the payments on student loans.

      Georgetown and Vanderbilt are fourth-tier institutions.

    9. I do not agree with a threshold LSAT score and/or GPA.

      I've seen one too many English or history majors get into "top" schools over a science major with a lower GPA. Plus, I have serious doubts about the relevance of the LSAT.

      However, I think there should be a real admissions process. In addition to an entrance exam, there should also be actual prerequisites in undergrad that an applicant is required to satisfy.

      For finalists, I think there should be an actual interview process, essays beyond a mere "personal statement" and possibly even some sort of audition process (such as a moot court or debate).

      In an ideal world (with considerably fewer slots in law school), I think this would be the way to go.

  2. Nando, your final paragraph perfectly sums up the state of the scam.
    Unfortunately, it appears the scam will not die. Pretty sure there were 7% more LSAT takers this year than last, and the total number of applicants is up, every so slightly, so far this cycle.
    Here's why-there is an endless supply of applicants, who come in three types:
    1. The true Lemmings: I actually feel sorry for these kids. These are the ones who are both naive and respect "authority", and more often are one of the minorities that the TTT schools now target. If a learned law school dean tells them that they'll be able to save the whales/fix poverty/save the innocent, they believe it. They are probably unaware of the true numbers for jobs, as they never looked because they trusted the law schools to tell them the "truth" about the practice of law. But these are only about 20% of the applicant pool. These are also the kids, who if they don't attend law school, attend one of the rapacious "career" schools, borrowing 50K to get that "degree" which isn't accredited by anyone in a field such as aesthetician or medical assistant or crime scene technician.
    2. The Special Snowflake: you've met these-they've seen Boston Legal/The Good Wife/Legally Blonde and just KNOW they could do that. After all, their mom tells them they're good at arguing. And yes, they know about the generally lousy job outcomes and huge debt-but they are different. They'll tell you as much. You've spoken with these kids-they are the next door neighbor or your cousin's boyfriend, and you've made the mistake of trying to talk them out of attending that TTT they were accepted at. Sometimes they act bored by your advice, sometimes they get belligerent, and get angry and tell you that you're "bitter" or a "hater" and they are special and are going to "succeed" no matter what you say. I can spot these kids a mile off, and stopped giving advice to them years ago. There is nothing you can say to them that will convince them of anything, because they are the true Special Snowflake. So when their parents tell me they'll be attending TJU or its ilk, I just smile weakly and wish them the best. These comprise about 40% of the TTT attendees.
    3. The just don't care: These are the remaining 40%. They've got a useless bachelor's in (you name the major) and have debt from college. Their job prospects consist of a. selling insurance or b. working retail. They know this, and also know that job outcomes for TTTs are terrible. But they don't care. The choice for them is to admit college was a terrible mistake, or go to law school and have another three years before having to admit anything. And since they aren't ever going to pay off that 50K from college, what's another 150k? Loans will allow them to go to school and most importantly not live in their parents' basement. And these will be almost as tough to stop from applying as the Special Snowflakes. Our society has created a paradigm where everybody is told they have to go to college, but our economy doesn't have the jobs for the graduates. Yes, it's a debt bomb that will explode, but not for a decade or so. And then it will be just like the mortgage crisis that just about torpeoed the world economy, where the final analysis will be "What were we thinking?" on every level.
    So hope I'm wrong, but don't see the scam ending anytime soon. As others have pointed out, the smart or savvy ones have stopped applying; what's left are applicants who are terminally naive, just plain special, or just don't care.

    1. 'Our society has created a paradigm where everybody is told they have to go to college, but our economy doesn't have the jobs for the graduates.'

      Fucking nailed it.

    2. surplus labor. prison industrial complex

    3. I lost a good friend like that. His son was considering law school. His father rented an apartment to me and I always paid the rent on time and we hung out. Hos father asked me to discuss the "merits" of attending law school. I told him not to and that I was struggling and that there was a terrible glut of attorneys chasing after the same jobs and three bill DUIs. Father told me to my face that I wasn't that effective or a good hustling attorney. The father said that I was the only attorney he ever rented one of his properties to. Father later apologized (he wanted his damn rent money, I guess).

    4. Father told me to my face that I wasn't that effective or a good hustling attorney.

      If his son is some pezzenovante hustler, then surely he already has his own little landscaping business? All you need for that is a little bedraggled pickup, a pushmower, and a wheedwhacker. Sure you can't do big yards, but it's enough capacity to do small yards. You can make some quick cash doing that.

      And if your kid is merely bumming around the house, with the last bits of that poli sci degree dribbling out his ears, why the fuck do you think he should go $150K into debt to get a ticket into a glutted profession?!? If the kid has shown no signs of hustle to this point, are you seriously stupid enough to think that the overpaid fops at a law school will give them magic hustle beans?

    5. Oh, yes, it's all about hustle! So says the dipshit who lies around all day eating potato chips and watching re-runs of Gilligan's Island. Pffffffffffffffft.

    6. I knew a girl who with AD/HD who was attending the other unranked legal trash piTTTT in San Diego. She was on a steady diet of amphetamines and cheap wine. She is now working on her "pension plan" by fucking marines for a living. I have nothing against prostitution, by the way, it's a very honest profession.

    7. There was another girl who got tired of a low-level career in the US military and started fucking officers and then went on to make a lot of money in prostitution.

      Her name is Air Force Amy.

      She 'retired' and then 'un-retired', more than once, because the money, simply, was just too good and sex is essentially all women have to offer yet they can be very well-paid for it.

      Men: Sorry Charlie.. you are SOOL.

    8. Indeed, Air Force Amy could be quite a role model for the young female law students attending these mill factories. Unfortunately, the girl I met was nowhere near as attractive as Amy, so she probably is going to have to work a little harder trying to pay for her non-dischargeable loan.

    9. That only works for deployed men in the 'sand box.' USA doesn't attack countries with hot ladies anymore. I beleive my friends called the phenomenon, "Iraqable."...
      It's also highly illegal and will get you discharged dishonorably, which is the equivalent of a felony, as far as employers are concerned.

  3. If the deceptive line "You can do anything with a law degree" were actually true, why do these TTTTs consistently have a higher unemployment rate than the rest of the labor force? TJLS’ 2014 unemployment rate (not an underemployment or “excluding part-time jobs” rate), as of 10 months after graduation, was 26.6%. But California’s unemployment rate was 6.5% at that time.

    As in “Dear TJLS applicant, we at TJL$ strive to avoid litigation since it is so costly and, frankly, our purpose for running this $chool is to pay our staff handsomely. Thus, we must make disclosures about your employment prospects: You are 4 times (!!!) MORE likely to be UNemployed if you go to TJL$ than if you play video games and develop a penchant for blow over the next 3 years. By going to TJL$ you likely think you’re a special snowflake, but in all likelihood, you’ll never repay your student loans. /s/ TJL$ career services.”

    Seriously, TJLS applicants, if you want >$200K in debt, go on an epic gap year exploring the world and/or studying for the GRE. At least you’ll have a statistical advantage in finding a job afterward.

    On to my next point, as a matter of deceptive trade practice law, how can schools use the “You can do anything…” line when the statements are objectively incorrect? This is beyond puffery – TTTTs’ sales pitches have become more deceptive than Jordan Belfort’s wettest of dreams.

    A school that places most of its graduates into California may have a tough time getting a FT/LT placement rate of 65% considering its bar passage rate. I get that. And applicants should know that trying to pass the bar in California is no joke. However, holyfuckingshit, only a shade over 50% of TJL$ graduates got *any* full time job – in *any* field after being allowed 10 months for a job search.

    In other words, employers don’t even want TJLS graduates for their undergrad degree. The analysis is clear: YOU CANNOT DO “ANYTHING” WITH A LAW DEGREE. If you actually believe that bullshit sales pitch I have some penny stocks to sell you.

    1. Most people can't borrow $200k for a trip around the world. Unfortunately, they can borrow that amount for a trip down the Thomas Jefferson toilet.

      A frightening thought: Thomas Jefferson and other toilets may be recruiting from the unemployable part of the population.

    2. Most people can't borrow $200k for a trip around the world.

      Most people can't borrow that much for a business idea. Imagine what would happen if the government gave 200K in loans to any kid with a pulse and a vague dream of running their own business. We'd be trillions in debt and have nothing to show for it but failed bands and a zillion startup clothing labels.

    3. Yeah, we're doing MUCH better just writing blank checks to Wall St. and Corporate America. Not like we aren't $18T in debt running that scam.

  4. Don't feel sorry for these people. They should have done the math upfront as well as due diligence.

    Getting any degree is no guarantee of a good paying job. Even if the employment stats were cooked they did not guarantee anything.

    In a way this is like going to Walmart and buying a product. Do I pay the extra money and get brand name, or save a few dollars and go generic.

    JD = product. With different price points in between. (depending on what you want to practice FAMU, Southern, TSU, etc. might get the job done.

    The dirty seceret is... if you have connections then it doesn't matter what school you attend.

    1. Yes. Spot on. I know guys with prior bar suspensions and serious sanctions lucratively practicing law. They have the connections and network and do very well.

    2. If you have connections, however, you are not going to Thomas Mother-Fucking Jefferson Law School & Army/Navy Surplus Boutique.

    3. But...if you went to DeVry or some other retarded school cause you have ADD/ADHD and earned a 2.4 in exercise physiology in five years...even pops who is corporate counsel at Snake Charm won't be able to get you into Marshall or NIU, so you settle for TJLS or Cooley. Then pops throws you the Subro cases....

  5. I do not like these diploma mill, correspondence like, no name law schools either. They de value the profession and my top Tier, hard earned law degree. BUT, if I learned anything in torts and from my PI referral buddies after I get excited that I hit the "jackpot" it is DAMAGES that counts. For a suit to succeed, one needs DAMAGES!!!!! Here it is far too speculative what DAMAGES there are. It is too fortuitous and speculative. What if Ms. Boeing found a law job that paid 55K per year? How do we know if she attended Harvard or Nando's toilet she would find a job? Look, nobody would sue Chevy for saying their trucks are "Like a Rock" when their trucks rust out after two Chicago winters. Rocks don't rust and they last forever. Same deal here.

    1. True, she will have to prove damages. She will also have to prove reasonable reliance on the data, as well as inaccuracy significant enough to induce her to attend when she otherwise would have turned the toilet down. I don't think that she can establish any of that, let alone all of it.

    2. Yeah this old Chevy has been through a few bad-as-Chicago winters and the rust is getting fearsome. I know you have to prove reliance and you have to prove damages, but then what?
      Has anyone determined whether TJSL has the assets to pay out from if any of these plaintiffs wins their case? Last year they lost their building to the bondholders, and I vaguely remember it referred to as the school's only asset. So where will an eventual payout come from?
      I did not go to the best school in the country (or even in its own city), but on Day One in Civ. Pro. the lesson was taught and remembered: Make sure your defendant has assets to pay out on your claims.

    3. Well, there's always the toilet's income stream (which consists mostly of tuition and other fees). But a successful litigant might never recover a penny.

      You've raised a good point: lemmings contemplating enrollment at a toilet in financial distress should consider that they may not be able to collect a legal claim against the toilet.

  6. “We were in full compliance with ABA requirements”

    is the ABA too big to fail?

  7. Why couldn't her sister get her a gig? Something is up, because the key to a law job is connections, contacts and networks. My buddies would hire me in a second, likewise if I became a Super Leading Lawyer, I would hire them. Bad facts are going to make for bad law in this lawsuit....

    1. Because she went to Thomas Jefferson. It would take one great Jesus of a connection to overcome that.

      Have a look at these data:

      In 2014, only 2 graduates out of 293 got jobs with firms having more than 100 lawyers. More than 40% of the graduates were "Non-Employed" ten months after graduation.

      Would you call in a favor for someone dumb and horrible enough to end up at Thomas Jefferson?

    2. For you, Old Guy, anything.

    3. Thank you. I'll bear that in mind when I sign up for an LLM in Dolphin Law at Thomas Jefferson.

  8. $50K at Boeing in California? That's really low. My neighbor is early 50s with just a degree from State U. No advanced degree. Seems like a nice guy but certainly no genius. No tech background either. And he's making closer to $80K a year there.

    1. Not doubting your anecdote, but $80k a year is firmly in the top 12% of earners:

      These are the actual numbers, not projected nonsense or what people feel they're making.

      Truth is most people in the US are broke. All the numbers look pretty bad. And this is why people can't afford lawyers.

    2. It is not that they can not afford a lawyer. They REFUSE to pay for legal services. Big difference. We live in a Walmart world. I have appeared in court for $100.00. Other neighborhood guys and solos have as well. Like a doctor, everybody wants it FREE. I know Public Defender clients who tell a court that they are INDIGENT. They don't like the deal the PD comes up with and they magically have the fees for a Private.

    3. I spent so many days in docket as a DA that I can verify 7:47's post. The problem is pretty simple: people don't want to pay for legal services, ever, period full stop. I've been to countless postponed arraignments where the defendant, who weeks earlier has completed the "under penalty of perjury" forms to qualify for a PD, suddenly found the few $$ to get a private attorney. It's so bad that they'll pay fifty bucks to a lawyer who is there on another case to get the six week postponement, with both the lawyer and "client" knowing that lawyer will be "fired" the second both walk out of the courtroom.
      And sometimes the clients never pay; I had a defendant who got 12(yes, that's right, TWELVE, postponements)-how? He started with the PD, and our courts are so busy and our solos are so desperate that 11 private attorneys entered appearance after the PD was fired-and not one got paid-they were one appearance wonders, each released by the judge after explaining that defendant hadn't paid-and defendant would, in open court, agree he hadn't paid. This was an abberation, to be sure, as two of the judges hearing his case retired, three senior judges appeared on the case only once, etc but it highlights how the system can be milked-for free-by an experienced defendant.
      And you ought to meet the people who show up at mandatory(for attorneys) pro bono(yes, I realize that's a contradiction) clinics-many, many people who could well afford a lawyer but just won't pay. That's the dirty little secret of solo despair-actually getting paid for your services.

    4. In San Francisco, I've found that entry-level jobs requiring a college degree usually pay low- to mid-40s. I was really lucky to score a first full-time job that paid 55k, but that was after a year of underemployment working multiple part-time gigs. Pay in law sucks, but let's not inflate the numbers for other fields here.

  9. I just got back from watching The Big Short. It's got Christian Bale and a bunch of other good actors in it. One thing that really stuck with me was when the Mark Baum character in the movie got up to address a group and he told them that everything in America is based on fraud. Not just banking. But also education, food, sports. That was spot on.

    1. I agree. The US is a plutocracy. People can go to hell for the sake of corporate profits.

      Food is packed full of fat and other junk, without regard to public health. "Education" has been reduced to a credentialist scam that entrenches privilege.

    2. That the beauty of the United States. I saw a billboard for a buffet type restaurant in North Platte, Nebraska on the 4th of July, that read: "Eat till you EXPLODE! All you can eat for $7.99!" If you really want to see a country that really doesn't give a rats ass about its citizens, try Malaysia and China. Why the fuck haven't they found that plane yet?


    JDU accountholder “bsj23” started a thread labeled “Thomas Jefferson "employed" grads: pool cleaner, Victoria's secret sales clerk” – on January 4, 2016, at 4:05 pm. Here is the full original post:

    “Just noticed this little nugget:

    "The school is accused of reporting postgraduation employment figures that topped 90% in 2010 but neglecting to disclose that the figures included part-time work, such as pool cleaner and Victoria’s Secret sales clerk, the Associated Press reported this month, citing the suit and an attorney for the graduates."

    Apparently a bunch of new people sued the school in 2014.

    With all the ABA's focus on legal ethics, making you pass the MCLE, and state bars requiring you to get ethics CLEs...the law schools themselves set an extremely poor example.”

    Apparently, legal “ethics” only apply to little people. The “profession” itself is okay being filth. How honorable, huh?!?!

    Scroll down to see this flawless commentary from “flharfh,” from January 6, 2016 at 12:45 pm:

    “Percent of TJSL class of 2014 that found full time, long term attorney jobs within 10 months of graduation: 30%

    Percent of TJSL class of 2014 that was completely unemployed 10 months after graduation: 40%

    TJSL cost of attendance(assuming no scholarship): 68k/yr”

    Does anyone with an IQ above 60 want to defend this FOURTH TIER TRASH CAN?! What a great use of federal funds, right?!?!

    Lastly, these remarks from user “rossi” – from January 6, 2016 3:24 pm:

    “the new building is pretty awesome in a high value part of downtown SD. they likely will be evicted completely or forced to vacate part of it.

    went to a bar event there once. i kinda felt like i was in a childrens cancer ward, nearly everyone there is fooked and it was awkward to be around them.”

  11. How these bastards remain eligible for federally backed student loan money remains a real mystery. Hopefully, this "gainful employment rule" will soon be applied to these bottom-tier shitholes. And until the student loan pipeline is cut off from these chiselers once and for all, the scam will continue.

  12. speaking of victims, check out this grim snapshot of the future.

    This is the supporter of the "Old Guy." So, my handle will be "The Supporter of the Old Guy."

    Everyone, share your stories about how hard it is to get clients to pay for your services. Clients are getting worse. You have to get the full payment upfront or risked getting cheated out of your fees.

    1. Captain Hurska Carswell, Continuance KingJanuary 11, 2016 at 9:57 PM

      Criminal clients are the worst at paying. "Why do I need to pay a lawyer if I am innocent?" OR "Why did I pay you when they said I was guilty, what did you do for me?" The difference now is that they hyper price shop. Pull open any yellow pages and the Lawyer section has the most pages. We are competing with newbies who do TRIALS for 3 bills!!!

    2. I'm surprised to see that I have a nascent fan club.

      Never compete on the basis of price alone: it's a losing game. No matter how little you charge (assuming here that your rates are greater than zero), someone somewhere can always charge 10% less.

      If the market is so bad that you cannot distinguish yourself by any means but price, give up. Find something else to do. I happen to be doing well right now, but I will surrender my license before running a trial for $300.

    3. Can I join your fan club too, Old Guy? I'm already a fan anyway...

    4. Captain Hurska Carswell, Continuance KingJanuary 12, 2016 at 6:47 PM

      I used to post as Anonymous. Old Guy is now my guru. I am posting as Captain Hurska Carswell, Continuance King. Follow me as a I drive the Prawfs crazy at the Faculty Lounge Blog.

  13. Just saw this news report on the SCOTUS and law school debt ....

  14. I bet Florida Coastal is proud of this alum:

    The U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday to hear an appeal by a would-be lawyer who has been seeking to discharge more than $260,000 in business and law school debt in bankruptcy.

    Mark Tetzlaff, 57, graduated from Florida Coastal School of Law, but has repeatedly failed the bar exam. He said in papers filed in his Chapter 7 case that he could not repay due to alcoholism, depression and a criminal record that have blocked him from getting employment, the Wall Street Journal (sub. req.) reports.

    He lives in Wisconsin with his mother, who supports the household with her Social Security payments. He filed the bankruptcy case in that state in 2012.

  15. Captian Hurska Carswell, A Leading SuperlawyerJanuary 11, 2016 at 7:15 PM

    Nando, did you find work? Are you dead? Why haven't you posted our sagacious, erudite comments in support of the law schools academy and their Deans and wing ding deans. I went to the University of Washington website today to research the new president of the AALS. Holy crap, I thought Illinois was bloated with twenty five prison guards for every non-violent prisoner....They must have 300 hundred employees!

  16. I'll try to keep this short. If I ramble on forgive me.

    I graduated 10 years ago with my degree. I took a step backwards in terms of pay and prestige with my first job after law school. But I took the shit anyway because it's what I went to school for. And I wanted to put my degree to use.

    I got burned out within 3 years of representing the worst elements of society. Yes, the fucking worst humanity has to offer. In the process, I gained 30 pounds and started losing my hair. By age 30, I looked 40. I maybe worked out twice a month. So I said fuck it. I up and quit that shit and I have been happy ever since. My hair even managed to mostly grow back. It must've been the fucking stress of working in the shitty oh so fucking shitty legal field.

    Anyway, an old friend of mine just called and told me that she mentioned my name to a criminal defense lawyer in town. And that the hiring partner wants to meet me for coffee to discuss the offer. I politely refused. I told my good friend that I'm not fucking interested. At. All. Not. Fucking. Interested.

    I make much more where I'm at without all the stress. I even get to travel for my job. I had to hustle like a motherfucker to get here. But I've been here for 6 almost 7 years. I've got a lot of friends here and good coworkers. Go back to law? Fuck that.

    Let me just say this. Before I go. And I'm thinking this is my one and only comment on this forum. So I want to be clear. I would rather have a job trimming Henry Kissinger's nose hairs than fucking work as a lawyer again. I mean that. It's a horrible profession filled with sick assholes from top to bottom. Thanks for letting me vent. I've held that in for too long. And that's with being at a good non lawyer job for the last 7 years. I tell you, this profession does a number on the psyche. Sometimes I wake up wih night sweats thinking of this shit.

  17. The argument of the law schools is the same type used at the Nuremberg trials.

  18. " “We were in full compliance with ABA requirements”"

    So what, does complying with the ABA immunize a Law School from a charge of fraud? Fraud is fraud regardless of what the ABA thinks of the matter.

  19. HLS playing the transfer game:

    1. I think Harvard might be poaching URMs. The 509 doesn't show much attrition loss.


    More bad news for this certifiable dung heap. On January 7, 2016, the ABA Journal posted a Debra Cassens Weiss piece that was entitled “Judge refuses to toss suit over law school’s employment stats; trial is set for March.” Here is the full text of that article:

    “A California judge has refused to dismiss a lawsuit claiming that Thomas Jefferson School of Law inflated its employment statistics.

    In a Dec. 28 decision (PDF), Judge Joel Pressman of San Diego allowed the students’ claims and set a March trial date, Above the Law reports. “Never before has a law school been forced to actually stand trial for allegedly inflating its employment statistics,” the blog says. “This is historic.”

    The four plaintiffs allege the school violated California law regarding unfair business practices, false advertising and consumer protection, and committed the torts of intentional fraud, negligent misrepresentation and negligence.

    Pressman said there are triable issues of fact as to whether the four plaintiffs reasonably relied on the employment statistics in deciding whether to attend the school, and whether the statistics were inaccurately reported.

    “Plaintiffs have all stated they believed that the employment statistics in U.S. News & World Report reflected the status of graduates who either worked in a professional capacity, worked as attorneys or worked in law-related jobs,” Pressman wrote.

    “The ‘methodology’ section in U.S. News & World Report is not necessarily dispositive,” Pressman continued. “It states: ‘Employed graduates includes those reported as working or pursuing graduate degrees.’ This does not necessarily render plaintiffs’ interpretation unreasonable. A reasonable consumer would not believe employment figures included any and all employment, which would render the figure meaningless in the context of a legal education. A reasonable consumer expects the employment figure to include graduates who work in law-related jobs.”

    Lawyers for the students told Above the Law they plan to present evidence that the school reported different numbers to U.S. News & World Report and to the National Association for Law Placement. The lawyers also allege the school had a practice of reporting graduates as employed as long as they had any job at any time since graduation.”

    While I personally don’t expect much to happen from this lawsuit, this is still rather impressive. Apparently, Joel Pressman has some integrity – and is one of the few worthy of being called “Judge.” This represents the first time that one of the suits against the law school pigs that has made it to this stage. We'll see what happens. In the meantime, expect the cockroaches to continue the scam and to financially ruin more lemmings.

    1. The suit will fail. The judge allowed it to go forward just because, viewed in the light most favorable to the claimants, it wasn't plainly doomed.

      Again, I don't support the plaintiffs in this suit. I don't believe that they reasonably relied on the data, or even examined them seriously, when they decided to flush themselves down the Thomas Jefferson toilet.

      And let's not attack the integrity of the judges who have kicked similar suits out.


    Back on October 14, 2014, the San Diego Reader published a Dan Bauder piece that was labeled "Curtains for Thomas Jefferson School of Law?" Read the entire article below:

    "Two publications, City Journal, published by New York's Manhattan Institute, and JDJournal, which specializes in law-related issues, are essentially playing taps for San Diego's debt-plagued Thomas Jefferson School of Law.

    The school moved into a fancy new, eight-story building in early 2011. Now it has $133 million in tax-exempt bonds headed for default, says City Journal, and that was "predictable, even inevitable," says the publication. Jefferson's bonds have a junk rating. "From 2007 to 2013, Thomas Jefferson raised its acceptance rate from 45 percent to 81 percent — essentially open admissions — but enrollment still declined," says City Journal.

    As the Reader has been reporting, Thomas Jefferson consistently has a very low bar-exam pass rate among California's 21 accredited law schools. "The actual placement rate for Thomas Jefferson graduates in full-time legal positions within nine months of graduation is [close] to 25 percent," says City Journal.

    JDJournal explains that "the school has agreed to give its building to bondholders. The school has already assigned all of its cash assets to its bondholders...the law school is likely to lose its building and cease operations."

    Says City Journal, "When the bondholders' forbearance agreement with Thomas Jefferson ends in October, the law school may have to suspend operations if it cannot resume debt repayments...the diminishing viability of Thomas Jefferson's business model makes a happy outcome unlikely."

    Of course, the pigs are still in business. However, it is telling that their bonds had a junk rating as early as Fall 2014. Expect the swine to stay in operation, past this suit. In the end, as long as they can get their hooves on large bags of federal student loan money, they will continue to "educate" lemmings.


Web Analytics