Monday, March 27, 2017

Charlotte School of Law Has a New Dean; Pigs Trying to Join the Non-Profit World

Dean Steps Down, Remains on Faculty: On March 20, 2017, Michael Gordon wrote a Charlotte Observer piece entitled “Top Charlotte School of Law leader steps down.” Check out this opening:

“With his school’s future hanging in the balance, the dean of the beleaguered Charlotte School of Law is stepping down. 

Jay Conison has led the uptown, for-profit school for almost four years. Charlotte Law announced his departure with a four-paragraph statement Monday afternoon. Conison will remain on the faculty, the statement said. 

He will be replaced on an interim basis by Scott Broyles, a former federal prosecutor who joined the Charlotte faculty in 2006. 

“I am honored that the faculty has placed its trust in me as we move forward,” Broyles said in the school’s statement. “While we face serious challenges, our aim is clear: to restore faith in our institution through consistent standards in admissions and best practices in the classroom.” 

The school’s alumni, which in February called on Conison and school President Chidi Ogene to resign, applauded the change. 

“We are excited about Dean Broyles’ vision for the Charlotte School of Law and for his leadership,” said Charlotte attorney Lee Robertson Jr, president of the alumni association. “Dean Broyles has been a respected and dedicated member of the faculty for many years, and our alumni are optimistic for the future of our law school.” 

Conison led the for-profit school during its most tumultuous era and leaves his leadership position while the uptown school straddles an uncertain future. 

Charlotte Law, like law schools nationwide, was hit hard by the recession and the resulting shrinkage of legal jobs. But Charlotte Law’s problems only grew from there. 

In November, the school was placed on probation by the American Bar Association for longstanding problems with admission, curriculum and bar exam test scores. A month later, the Department of Education made the school the first-ever accredited law school to lose access to the federal student-loan program. The department singled out Conison and school President Chidi Ogene and accused them of hiding the seriousness of the school’s shortcomings from current and prospective students.” [Emphasis mine]

The fact that Jay Conison will remain on the faculty at this FOURTH TIER DUNG PIT shows that the school is merely moving chairs on a sinking ship. If the commode was truly outraged by his conduct, they would have asked him to resign his position. Then again, the typical “law professor” has less honor and integrity than a street thug. Hell, even the common criminal has enough balls to rob you – without pretending that they are performing a “public service.”

OTTTTher DevelopmenTTTT$: On March 22, 2017, Charlotte NPR affiliate WFAE featured a report labeled “Charlotte School Of Law To Go Non-Profit As Part Of Overhaul.” The story is from Lisa Worf and Marshall Terry. Take a look at this revealing portion:

“Charlotte School of Law is on its way to becoming a non-profit. It's part of the plan to get the law school's federal loan money re-instated. WFAE's Lisa Worf has been following the school's struggles since the American Bar Association placed the law school on probation this past fall. She joins Morning Edition host Marshall Terry.

MT: How would this work? 

LW: The school's new dean, Scott Broyles, says the plan is to partner with a university in the northeast. InfiLaw, the company who now owns Charlotte School of Law, wouldn't make academic decisions, but, instead, deal with the school's day-to-day operations. 

MT: How much of a difference would this change make? Is it a smokescreen? 

LW: It's hard to say at this point. It's not clear how that agreement between the non-profit board and InfiLaw would work, nor how much the school would pay InfiLaw. But the plan also calls for faculty to play a bigger role in making academic decisions, starting with admissions standards. Here's Broyles: 

SB: Kind of the hydraulic pressures that were out there moving us in the bad direction for the last few years as far as the quality of students, we've effectively removed all that… 

MT: Is this enough to persuade the Department of Education to begin cutting federal loan checks again to Charlotte School of Law? 

LW: That remains to be seen. A letter from the Department of Education in January didn't mention the option of re-instating federal loan money to the school back. It simply noted because the school hadn't agreed to close, students wouldn't have their federal loans forgiven. But Broyles says a few things have changed since then. 

SB: The complaints that were out there, that were addressed by the ABA and then in part adopted by the DOE people, those have been resolved for practical purposes. They really don't have any reason to criticize the school going forward. And, secondly, it's a new administration. 

LW: He's talking about the Department of Education under the Trump administration. Previously, the department was cracking down on for-profit colleges, but the current administration has a better view of them. Broyles thinks that'll help the school, even though the plan still is to become a non-profit.” [Emphasis mine]

How honorable, huh?!?!

Conclusion: As you can see, the cockroaches are trying to explore their opTTTTion$. The bitches and hags realize that there is less heat on for-profit cess pits, but they are also looking at joining a non-profit in the northeast United States. In the final analysis, the law school pigs will do and say anything to keep the gravy train of federal student loan money pouring into their troughs. Those who attend such trash heaps deserve their fate.

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

Second Tier Sewer Dean David Faigman Posts LA Times Op-Ed Bitching About the California Bar Exam Being Too Difficult

Crocodile Tears: On March 21, 2017, David Faigman posted a Los Angeles Times op-ed, headlined “The California bar exam flunks too many law school graduates.” Take a look at this opening:

“I still remember opening the envelope with my California bar exam results. It’s one of those flashbulb memories. I passed, with more relief than joy. Much has changed since then. Graduates no longer open envelopes; they check scores on a computer. I was a professor then, and now I am the dean. But the basic experience has not changed. Thousands of graduates continue to hold their breath each fall as they check their scores. A lot depends on those results.

Graduates who fail face losing jobs already started, not getting jobs that were promised, debt, embarrassment and more debt. Simply taking the exam again costs more than $700, and add to that the cost of further bar review classes, living expenses in the meantime and income lost. All told, thousands more dollars may be piled onto law school debt that is increasingly well above $100,000.

Most of those who fail their first attempt eventually pass the bar on the second or third try. After each attempt, however, these graduates do not learn to be better lawyers, they simply learn how to beat the test. And the damage done from the initial failure can be great. In addition to the financial costs, they may find themselves timed out of promising professional opportunities that never reappear. Finally, there are the emotional and psychological costs that are possibly the most overwhelming consequence of even one failed attempt.

Given the stakes for the individual law graduate, as well as the state’s obligation to ensure that those given a license to practice law are qualified, one would think the state bar, which administers the test, would have sound reasons for how it sets the line — the “cut score” — between passing and failing. If you thought that about California, you would be mistaken.” [Emphasis mine]

You consign your students to outrageous sums of NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, but you are focusing on $700 for an applicant to re-take the bar exam?!?! That is the “logic” of law school pigs. Of course, these bastards are going to teach you how to “think like a lawyer.” By the way, have you ever laughed at how these supposed wordsmiths and “scholars” keep using this grammatically incorrect phrase?

Earlier Coverage: Back on December 6, 2016, Joe Patrice authored an ATL entry labeled “Who’s To Blame For School’s ‘Horrific’ Bar Results? Maybe The California Bar Examiners.” Enjoy the following segment:

“The California Bar Examiners have sent letters to law schools informing them of their passage rates. For UC Hastings, acting Dean David Faigman was on the receiving end of “horrific” news. The July 2016 passage rate for first-time takers from Hastings was a mere 51 percent. 

Holy hell.

Faigman certainly doesn’t sugarcoat it in a message sent to the Hastings community. He calls it unacceptable. He highlights that the school is 11 points below the state average. He outlines concrete efforts the school will make to help those who failed. He explains that he’s already taken steps designed to improve passage rates going forward. You can read his entire message and evaluate his proposals for yourself here. 

And while some alums are understandably dissatisfied with what they see as the deeper problem born of slackening admission standards in the post-industry collapse world, at least this school is willing to be blunt about its bar exam problem instead of hiding behind a wall of obfuscation… 

As an aside, let me express my utter incredulity with the conduct of the Committee of Bar Examiners of the State Bar of California. The pass-rate for first-time takers of ABA accredited California law schools was 62%. In comparison, New York’s bar-pass rate was 83%. The California Bar is effectively saying that 38% of graduates from ABA accredited law schools are not qualified to practice law. This is outrageous and constitutes unconscionable conduct on the part of a trade association that masquerades as a state agency. 

However shameful the State Bar’s conduct, it does not relieve us of our obligation to fully prepare our students to pass the bar exam.” [Emphasis mine]

Your admi$$ion$ “standards” keep dropping, ass-wipe. Is that the state bar examiners’ fault?!

The Toilet’s Tuition: As you can see, estimated in-state tuition and fees for full-time students at University of California, Hastings Commode of the Law stand at $48,971 – for the 2017-2018 school year. Non-residents attending on a full-time basis will be ass-raped to the tune of $54,971 in tuition and fees, for the same academic year. Still want to take the plunge, waterhead?!?!

Check Out the Trash Pit’s Ranking: According to the cat litter box liner known as US “News” & World Report, the Univer$iTTy of California Ha$TTing$ Commode of the Law is co-rated as the 54th greatest, most fantastic and remarkable law school in the entire damn country! At least it only shares this “distinct honor” with two other diploma mills: University of Connecticut and University of Houston.

Conclusion: David Faigman is your typical academic con man. He takes no responsibility for his actions or those of his ABA-accredited dung heap. If the toilet takes in dumber students, in order to get more asses in seats, the resultant drop in bar passage rates is the the fault of somone else, i.e. lazy-ass JDs or the state bar examiners. How honorable, huh?!?!

Saturday, March 18, 2017

Enjoy the US News & World Report Law School Indebtedness Rankings, for the Class of 2016, Lemmings!

Bend Over: On March 16, 2017, Matt Leichter posted a Law School Tuition Bubble piece that was labeled “ Only 13 Law Schools Didn’t Report 2016 Graduate Debt to U.S. News.” Take a look at this opening:

“Each year U.S. News & World Report lists law schools by the average indebtedness of their graduates. Importantly, the figures exclude accrued interest, which can be quite considerable. However, these numbers are probably the best estimate of the cost of attendance at a particular law school presented in a comparable form. The ABA does not publicize graduate debt in the 509 information reports, making U.S. News an unfortunately necessary source. 

Here’s the debt table. A recurring problem in U.S. News’ debt data is law schools that misreport their graduating students’ annual debt as opposed to their cumulative debt, which is what the magazine asks for. Thus, I include last year’s numbers for illustration and encourage ridicule of law schools that cannot follow basic directions, but I welcome corrections. 

1. Thomas Jefferson 172,726 182,411 5.6% 
2. Whittier 148,316 179,056 20.7% 
3. San Francisco 162,434 167,671 3.2% 
4. New York University 166,022 167,646 1.0% 
5. Georgetown 160,606 166,027 3.4% 
6. American 160,274 164,194 2.4% 
7. Golden Gate 143,740 161,809 12.6% 
8. Columbia 168,627 159,769 -5.3% 
9. John Marshall (Chicago) 162,264 158,888 -2.1% 
10. Florida Coastal 160,942 158,878 -1.3%  [Emphasis mine]

Still want to take the plunge, Dumbass?!?! Would you also like the waiter to pour toilet water in your soup the next time you go to your favorite sit down restaurant? Perhaps, you wouldn’t mind paying your senile neighbor $8,000 in cash for his 1989 Buick LeSabre – with 298K miles on the odometer.

Later on, Leichter points out the following:

“And per this post’s title, here’s the List of Shame: Law schools that chose not to submit their graduates’ debt information to U.S. News, along with their last-reported figures and the year in which they reported them. Thanks to the gainful employment rule, I was able to track down median graduate debt at three for-profits. As I am merciful, I exclude the three Puerto Rico law schools from this count. 

 Arizona Summit [Phoenix] – $178,263 [2015, median, for-profit] 
 Atlanta’s John Marshall – $161,910 [2015, median, for-profit] 
 Charlotte – $145,834 [2015, median, for-profit] 
 Touro – $154,855 (2014) 
 Southwestern – $147,976 (2012) 
 Thomas (FL) – $140,808 (2014) 
 New England – $132,246 (2013) 
 WMU Cooley – $122,395 (2012) 
 Appalachian – $114,740 (2012) 
 La Verne – $112,628 (2012) 
 Texas Southern – $99,992 (2012) 
 Concordia – NEVER 
 Indiana Tech – NEVER [Emphasis in original]

Here’s a rule of thumb: if you are considering a particular cesspit to piss away the next three years of your life – and those bastards do not disclose their most recent average law student indebtedness figures – do not apply! It’s that simple. If you wouldn’t rent an apartment without stepping inside the place first, why the hell would you make such a HUGE financial decision without this vital info?!?! You would likely refrain from purchasing a moderately priced piece of art, without a certificate of authenticity from a reputable firm. Frankly, you wouldn't buy from a store that doesn't offer returns. Don’t toss your brain in the trash when looking at law schools. Exercise some critical judgment.

Straight From USN&WR: Here is the direct source, for Leichter’s figures. I know that people love the latest rankings each year. Hell, it’s about the only thing keeping this magazine even remotely relevant. However, as we all know if you’re attending the 40th, 57th, or 89th “best” law school in the county, it doesn’t really matter for your future job prospects. The only difference might be the debt you incur – depending on cost of living, tuition discounts, and whether your commode is private or public. Last year, Bob Morse went with an idiotic format – in which he listed ABA diploma mills by state, which were listed by alphabetic order.

Conclusion: If you are still seeking to attend law school, with all the available evidence showing that it is a terrible gamble for the vast majority of students, then you are a simpleton. At least, now you can access the charts above so that you don’t completely ruin yourself financially, in the process of attaining a “legal education.” Look at the top 10 list, cited by Leichter. Only NYU and Columbia are highly rated, and Georgetown is historically a “top 14” diploma mill. The rest are festering piles of garbage. 

What will your employment outlook be coming out of a place such as TTTThoma$ Jeffer$on Sewer of Law, WhiTTTTier, or Florida Coa$TTTTal? Even if you perform better than the average sucker enrolled at those dung heaps, decent law firms and workplaces will still see that name on your resume or cover letter. Good luck, Bitch. That’s akin to asking out a lovely woman – right after disclosing that you have a rash on your balls.

Tuesday, March 14, 2017

Transcontinental TTTT Partnership: Arizona Summit Law Sewer Has Affiliated With HBCU Bethune-Cookman University

Desperation at Arizona Summit Continues: On March 10, 2017, Elie Mystal covered this silly nonsense in an ATL entry labeled “Arizona Summit: Now Counting On Black People Not Knowing How To Use Google.” He comes out swinging:

“As we mentioned in Morning Docket, legal diploma mill Arizona Summit Law School has entered into an affiliation agreement with Bethune-Cookman University, a historically black college. 

This seems like a good time to mention that Bethune-Cookman is in Florida while Arizona Summit is in… Arizona. I want this point to be clear. 

Officials from Bethune-Cookman and Arizona Summit say that they’ve entered into this transcontinental arrangement to further their mutual goals of increasing diversity in the legal profession. Here are some quotes:

“This enables us to take it to a much higher level sooner, swifter and with greater impact,” Arizona Summit President Donald Lively said. 

Bethune-Cookman President Edison Jackson said in a statement, “Together, we aim to be a leading force in disrupting a legacy of exclusion that has persisted into the 21st century.” 

With all due respect to Mr. Lively and Mr. Jackson, these quotes represent some of the dumbest takes on legal education available in the English language. NOTHING THAT THEY ARE SAYING MAKES ANY SENSE. 

To Edison Jackson, I’d ask: How, how in the ACTUAL F**K, does sending students to a law school that boasts a 25% first-time bar passage rate disrupt “a legacy of exclusion that has persisted into the 21st century”? NEWS FLASH: Black people who have been to law school but don’t pass the bar ARE STILL EXCLUDED FROM THE LEGAL INDUSTRY. This is like saying that we’re going to increase diversity in the medical profession by giving every black child a free game of Operation.

Sorry, my analogy fails because Arizona Summit is NOT FREE. The school charges $45,424, for its for-profit education, and then there’s another $22,100 to live in Phoenix for a year. 

Going to a law school like Arizona Summit doesn’t help black people, it hobbles them. Economically disadvantaged minorities are in a terrible position to shoulder the (LST-estimated) $249,469 cost of three years of attendance, only to graduate with an education that doesn’t prepare them to pass the bar and a degree that is practically worthless. I mean, my God, the Arizona Summit bar passage rate is their rate in Arizona. CAN YOU IMAGINE what the pass rate is for Arizona Summit grads who try to pass the Florida bar? Bethune-Cookman grads who go out to Arizona Summit are likely leaving behind family, friends, their entire community network (see MAP, above). THEY’LL NEVER RETURN, not as employed lawyers at least. I don’t know the employment rate for Arizona Summit grads in any Southeastern legal market, but if I put the over/under at 2%, would you really feel great about taking the over?” [Emphasis mine]

This man speaks the truth about the law school scam, and he roasted the pigs at Arizona $ummiTTTT Law Sewer accordingly. This is a FOR-PROFIT, FOURTH TIER TRASH CAN in the InfiLaw system – which is owned and operated by Chicago-based, private equity firm Sterling Partners. Do you think – for one millisecond – that the “professors” and shareholders give one goddamn about black students from Bethune-Cookman?!?! They just see them as dollar signs/marks.

Other Coverage: Also on March 10, 2017, the Arizona Republic published an Anne Ryman piece that was entitled “Arizona Summit Law School moves to affiliate with a private, nonprofit university.” Check out this excerpt:

“Arizona Summit has won awards for its diverse student population, which is about 43 percent minority students.

Many of the Summit’s students come to law school in a “catch-up mode,” Interim Dean Penny Willrich said in a recent interview with The Arizona Republic. Some are from poor families. They are astute, bright and want to become attorneys, she said.

“What we try to do is meet our students where they are when they come in the door,” she said. 

But legal experts and law-school watchdogs question whether Arizona Summit admitted too many students. The school, formerly known as the Phoenix School of Law, once had as many as 1,000 students as it admitted more students with lower Law School Admission Test scores. 

That, combined with a change in curriculum, resulted in fewer students passing the bar on the first try, officials said.” [Emphasis mine]

Who gives a damn about the toilet’s awards for diversity in enrollment?!?! If their goal is to increase the number of minority lawyers, they are failing miserably. Furthermore, how many black and brown students at Arizona $ummiTTTT Law Sewer have been financially ruined/ass-raped by attending this cesspit?!

Conclusion: If you’re a moron still considering law school, don’t even contemplate attending a FOURTH TIER TRASH CAN, let alone a for-profit one. Furthermore, do not enroll in a pile of excrement with a first-time Arizona bar passage rate of 24.7 percent! In fact, it’s a good idea to forget about going to a commode that pays its recent graduates - on separate occasions, $5,000 to as much as $36,000 in stipends per student - to NOT take the bar exam. This rancid garbage heap is partnering with a historically black college or university that is more than 2,100 miles away. That is the essence of desperation, people. When these young men and women are unable to get licensed, the swine will blame it on the state board of examiners or “institutional racism.” But that is a ruse, as the cockroaches will have cashed dozens more federal student loan checks. And that is the name of the game!

Friday, March 10, 2017

Crooklyn Law School Pig Nicolas Allard is Happy to Use “Social Justice” to Attract and Fleece More Students

Allard Sticks His Hoof in His Snout Again: On February 24, 2017, Pig Nicolas Allard added an excrementitious opinion piece labeled An unexpected Trump effect: Lawyer as hero.” Take a look at this filth that appeared in The Hill:

“Almost single handedly, President Trump has made lawyers the breakout stars in the early days of his new administration. 

Legal experts in immigration and refugee law, international trade, religious freedom, and the constitutional powers of the executive branch have, seemingly overnight, become regular guests on network and cable news, quoted on front pages of national newspapers, and gained thousands of followers on social media. 

Law schools can seize this moment and, like the generation inspired by Woodward and Bernstein to pursue careers in journalism, lead the renaissance in legal education that would revive a profession in need of an injection of youth, idealism, and high-tech savvy. 

Lawyers are playing a central role in this grand national civics class that we have been called to attend. With in-depth legal knowledge and an encyclopedic sense of history, these men and women — judges, law practitioners, scholars, and law students — have raised our collective consciousness (with the help of musical theater’s Alexander Hamilton) about the important role lawyers and the law have played in the founding of our nation and the ongoing stability of our system conferred by the adherence to the rule of law.

The armies of lawyers and law students that descended on major airports across the country in the wake of the president’s executive order banning immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries, as lawyers from the ACLU prepared their case to stay the ban in federal court, inspired a sense of pride in the profession not experienced in years. 

Many of our students and faculty members were standing outside the United States courthouse in downtown Brooklyn in the cold January night cheering with thousands of others as the lawyers bounded down the stairs with the court-ordered stay in their hands.” [Emphasis mine]

Congratulations, Lard Ass. Your students and faculty members were mere cheerleaders in this great “civil awakening.” Then again, that was probably the most “productive” your “legal scholars” have been in years. Unless, of course, you count reading the Washington Post and doing the New York Times crossword puzzle as “work.”

Later on, the fat swine – who appears to have not missed a meal in decades – chortled over his garbage pit, Crooklyn Law School, seeing a 12 percent increase in applications last year. And that is all that matters to these devils. There are so many holes in this bastard’s “argument,” a ten year old could rip it to shreds. First, lawyers and legislators at this nation’s founding played a central role in legalizing slavery and in classifying black men and women as “chattel.” Plus, bar passage rates are declining around the country – largely because the commodes are admitting more cretins and simpletons. Also, should one take on $180K+ in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt for a chance to become a “good, public-spirited lawyer”?!

Law Student Busts Up Allard’s Weak Case: On March 4, 2017, Alexander Grass – a student at the Benjamin N. Cardozo Sewer of Law at Ye$hiva Univer$ity – wrote a great response in Learn Liberty. That article was entitled “Social justice lawyers” won’t save law school.” Here are a couple of excerpts of Grass wiping his ass with Allard’s snout:

“Last Friday, the Dean of Brooklyn Law School, Nicholas Allard, published an op-ed in The Hill that theorized a recent minor uptick in the number of law school applications was due to “the intense interest among many Millennials in issues of social justice and the urge to make a positive difference.” 

More specifically, Dean Allard pointed to the hordes of attorneys and law students that packed airport terminals in January to provide counsel to visitors caught up in President Trump’s poorly conceived immigration ban. In the dean’s opinion, these activists inspired new law school applicants “like the generation inspired by Woodward and Bernstein to pursue careers in journalism.” 

There are entrenched, systemic problems in legal education — over-valued sticker prices, nearly insurmountable student loan debt, curricular requirements that skimp on teaching real lawyering practices — that guarantee law school is a bad choice for many or most students. Dean Allard is making an emotional appeal, but the truth is that legal education is undergoing permanent changes. These changes mean that fewer students should go to law school, constitutional crisis or not.” [Emphasis mine]

That was a nice, stiff combination to Nicholas Allard’s head, snapping his head and hot dog neck back a bit. The cockroach can only make an emotional appeal, preying on idealistic young people, because that is all he has left in his “arsenal.” Now, for the knockout blow:

“Even if, as Dean Allard imagines, future law students are ready to charge the gates in the name of social justice, they still have to pass the bar exam. With historically low pass rates at both the state and national level — only 43 percent passed California’s 2016 bar exam, for instance — many law school alumni won’t even become lawyers.

Dean Allard is begging for an injection of underqualified lawyers into a market whose growth has been steadily declining for decades. Or, as the Bureau of Labor Statistics puts it, “more students graduate from law school each year than there are jobs available.” 

The dean has no proposal about what to do with the steadily growing pool of law students who can’t become attorneys. Instead, he offers hollow platitudes about how we’ve “lost sight of how critically relevant lawyers are to the social order,” and how there’s “precious little understanding of … the role lawyers play in bringing to fruition all the benefits of our constitutional guarantees.” [Emphasis mine]

Conclusion: In the final analysis, Nicholas Allard is a cockroach who will do and say anything – in order to get more asses in seats at his second tier sewer. He is no different from the deans and “presidents” at the other ABA-accredited diplomas, other than perhaps being a little more portly and aggressive in defending the law school scam in public forums. Hell, since 2014 he has been constantly bitching about the bar exam being “too difficult.” Ask yourself the following: Would you buy a used car from this bastard?!

Sunday, March 5, 2017

TTTT Signs of Desperation: Arizona Summit Law Sewer Shells Out $36,000 Stipend to Induce Individual Graduates to Delay Taking the Bar Exam

Paying Grads to Delay: On February 27, 2017, the ABA Journal featured a Stephanie Francis Ward piece entitled “Will delaying the exam, adding training help Arizona Summit students pass the bar.” Check out this meaty opening:

“A year ago, Kelly Blake was stressed out. The Arizona Summit School of Law graduate was studying for the state bar and suspected that her chance at passing was about 50 percent. 

“A bar coach told me that if I was having doubts, there was this program coming up,” says Blake, referring to the school’s Legal Residency Program. To participate in it, Arizona Summit graduates delayed taking a bar exam, and in exchange got four months of specialized bar review courses, optional law clerk positions and a stipend of approximately $36,000. 

It was open to all Arizona Summit graduates planning to take a bar exam, but the school does not it encourage it for people who appear ready for the test, Alan Mamood, the program’s lead instructor, says. 

Blake decided to join the program. The January 2015 graduate and 35 other program participants were expected to take the February 2017 bar exam. 

“I had studied all summer for the bar and I wanted to take it, but I had not secured a job and I have four children,” says Tracy Gillespie, another 2015 Arizona Summit graduate in the pilot program. “It’s a great opportunity the school offers for those people who for whatever reason are not able to really get the full studying the first time around,” Gillespie says. 

A for-profit law school that is part of the Infilaw System, Arizona Summit had a bar passage rate of 24.6 percent for its July 2016 first-time test takers. 

Some law school critics accuse the school of paying students to sit out the bar exam as a way to increase bar passage rates. The cynical view is that money spent on the pilot project could be a cost of doing business for the law school, which has 279 students and charges $45,424 for annual, full-time tuition. 

Donald Lively, the law school’s president, objects to accusations that his school’s legal residency program is meant as a tool to deceive people. 

“No one is bought off. All we’re trying to do is come up with an innovative solution for what has been a very vexing problem,” Lively says. “We bring in students who are in catch-up mode. They’ve gone to schools in less advantaged communities, and many have not had the same level of quality education as people who grew up in more fortunate circumstances.” [Emphasis mine]

Do you like how the name of the scheme tries to give this garbage a ring of legitimacy? Yes, what decent law firm wouldn’t want to hire some cretin who attended a FOURTH TIER TRASH CAN and its Legal Residency Program?!?! I’m sure Hiring Partners are falling all over themselves to snag up several of these award winners! By the way, Cockroach Donald Lively: if you are so concerned about your students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds, then maybe you shouldn’t charge $45,354 in full-time tuition for the 2016-2017 school year!!

Prior Coverage: If this story sounds familiar, that is because the swine at this private toilet tried this before, although the dollar amount then was smaller. On October 16, 2016, Staci Zaretsky posted an ATL entry labeled “Law School Posts Worst Bar Exam Passage Rates In Its Existence, Drags Down Entire State’s Passage Rates.” Read the following portion and ask yourself if this school is serving the “profession”:

“This summer, we regaled our readers with the tale of one for-profit law school’s plan to keep its low-performing students from taking the bar exam — and then failing the bar exam — immediately following graduation. The law school now requires that all students with GPAs below a 3.33 take and pass a mock bar exam as a graduation requirement, knowing full well that such a requirement may preclude countless students from being able to graduate and further sully their otherwise abysmal bar exam passage rates. 

Prior to implementing this plan, the law school allegedly offered graduates a four-month, intensive bar preparation program with a $5,000 stipend and called graduates the day before the exam and offering a $10,000 stipend for them to defer taking it. The institution in question is Arizona Summit Law School (formerly known as the Phoenix School of Law), and now that the results from the July 2016 administration of the Arizona bar are out, it’s time to see if anything this school has done to better prepare its graduates for the test has worked out. Thus far, nothing has helped Summit graduates[.] [Emphasis mine]

The bar results were still BEYOND PATHETIC! I guess this commode will never learn. Then again, a piece of trash named Neil Vincent Wake tossed out a lawsuit against Arizona $ummiTTTT for fraud and misrepresentation on December 27, 2016. Nice Christmas gift to the school, pig! You can damn near always count on politicians in black robes to do what is favorable to the Establishment.

Conclusion: If you are still considering law school, after the mountain range of evidence that shows it is a stupid decision for the vast majority of students, then at least have enough brain cells to not apply to Arizona $ummiTTTT Law Sewer. The for-profit dung heap is rated as a FOURTH TIER CESSPIT every single damn year by “US “News” & World Report. The school is part of InfiLaw, which is owned by Sterling Partners, a Chicago-based private equity firm. Do you think – for one goddamn microsecond – that the “professors” or their investors give one single solitary droplet of excrement what happens to you?!?!

Wednesday, March 1, 2017

Third Tier Cesspit Albany Law Sewer Raises Tuition, to Compensate for Lower Enrollment

Booyah!: On February 28, 2017, the Albany Business Review published a piece from the Teutonic Shannon Sweeney, under the headline “Albany Law School raising tuition as enrollment declines.” Check out this sweet-ass opening:

“Albany Law School will increase tuition by 3 percent this fall for incoming and second-year students. 

That increase brings tuition to $45,882 a year — up from $45,546 this year. The private school's board met Friday to set the tuition rates, as first reported by the Times Union. Third-year students will pay $45,436 and fourth-year students will pay $34,007. 

Alicia Ouellette, the dean and president of Albany Law School, announced the increase in an email to students on Saturday morning. 

"The decision to increase tuition is never made lightly," Ouellette said in the email. "The main objective when considering tuition increase is balancing the educational needs of our student body with the school's financial responsibilities." 

Albany Law School's announcement echoes a nationwide trend of increasing tuitions — and declining enrollments — at law schools across the country. Nationally, law school tuition has increased dramatically since 1985, according to the American Bar Association.” [Emphasis mine]

Still want to take the plunge, Stupid?!?! I like how Pig Alicia Ouelette chortled “The decision to increase tuition is never made lightly.” That’s easy for you to say, swine. You aren’t the one who will be saddled with an additional $5,000 or more in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, for a TTT law degree. Did you happen to mention this in your recruiting materials?

Now, scroll down to this concluding paragraph:

“Albany Law School has seen enrollment decline the past few years — in 2013, the school had 600 students enrolled. This fall, the school had 397 students enrolled, according to the Business Review's College and Universities List. Nationwide, law school enrollment has declined since 2010.” [Emphasis mine]

You’re welcome, bitches! By the way, it’s always funny to see local reporters cite to the nationwide drop in law students, as if that lessens one particular trash pit’s falling numbers. Nice try, Shannon.

Other Coverage: On February 27, 2017, the Albany Times Union featured a Bethany Bump article simply entitled “Albany Law tuition climbs.” Take a look at the following portion:

“Tuition at Albany Law School will increase 3 percent this fall to $45,882 for incoming and second-year students, school officials announced in an email to students Saturday. 

The board of trustees met last Friday to set tuition rates. Tuition for third-year students will be $45,436 and tuition for fourth-year students, who pay three-quarters of the full rate, will be $34,007. 

School leaders offered few explanations for the increase beyond the need to balance the school's financial responsibilities with the educational needs of the student body. 

"The decision to increase tuition is never made lightly," said President and Dean Alicia Ouellette in the email. "Recognizing the significant financial stress that students and prospective students are under, the board and administration sought to keep the 2017-2018 increase as small as possible while ensuring that we continue to deliver a first-rate legal education." 

School officials did not respond to a request for comment Monday. According to the email sent Saturday, Ouellette and other deans at the school will be available to answer questions about the increase at an open session in early March. 

"I can assure you that the faculty, staff and administration are working hard to achieve efficiencies and keep costs down for our students without affecting the educational mission of the school and the direct services students receive," Ouellette said.” [Emphasis mine]

How can a festering garbage heap offer a “first-rate legal education,” Alicia?! How does that work exactly? While pompous “professors” at Yale and Harvard also read the same teacher’s education and rehash the same lecture notes for the last 20 years, those students will have a premier name on their diploma and every resume that they send out. Biglaw firms, federal pig “judges” and agencies will continue to hire them. Can you say the same for your cesspool?!?! Also, did you and your “professors” take a pay cut to help defray the cost increase?

The Toilet’s Ranking: According to US”News” & World Report, Albany Law Sewer is rated as the 129th greatest, most remarkable and brilliant law school in the entire goddamn country. What an accomplishment, huh?!?! The fact that it merely shares this distinction with one other commode, $anTTTa Clara Univer$iTTTy, shows that this is such a prestigious honor.

Conclusion: Albany Law Sewer is a GROSSLY OVERPRICED third tier pile of waste. Do you understand that if you attend this dung pit, you will effectively have a permanent stench associated with you?!?! When your cover letters and resumes feature the name “Albany Law School,” hiring partners and their secretaries will laugh until they cry. Your writing sample will serve as a napkin for spilled coffee on oak tables. When decent law firms don’t even bother to send you a one-line email thanking your for your interest in the position, you will understand better. Name brand matters GREATLY in the legal field. Now, you will be required to take on more student loan debt for the “privilege” of working in toiletlaw – or selling insurance policies.
Web Analytics