Aba Letter Oct 2014

8/10/2019 Aba Letter Oct 2014

1/11


2/11

Page 2 of 5

and gaining experience through externships to write in opposition to acquiescence.

As the Committee and the Section consider Infilawsproposal, we trust that

each member will be mindful of the important role the ABA plays in ensuring the

quality of the educational programs at each approved law school. The United States

Department of Education has delegated to the ABA the duty and authority to vetthe quality of programs of study at each approved law school; this is the only means

of determining which schools will be eligible to receive the federally backed student

loan fundsfunds without which no law school in this country could function.

Especially in this era of increased media, community, and governmental attention

to the short-and-long-term costs of education, scrutiny is justly placed on every

school, whether public or private, and accrediting bodies like the ABA to ensure

schools do not abuse the public trust in accessing this enormous source of capital. At

the same time, we are mindful of the narrow perch from which the ABA must

conduct its oversight in light of the ever-present threat of antitrust litigation

surrounding your exercise of this duty.

In navigating this nearly untenable landscape, the Committee and the

Council are to be guided by the ABA Standards and Rules of Procedure for Approval

of Law Schools. While these standards include limited specific guidance regarding

acquiescence to major changes, inherent in any acquiescence must be a finding that

the adherence to standards at the school seeking acquiescence will not recede in the

wake of such acquiescence. And yet, in this case, that is precisely the concerna

concern which is supported by objective facts about Infilaws management of the

three schools it already owns.

While not an exhaustive list, the following standards are at risk of violation

at the Charleston School of Law in the event of the proposed change in ownership:

Standard 201: Rather than demonstrate a

commitment to the financial stability of the Charleston

School of Law, since its arrival on the campus, Infilaw has

made clear that it seeks to purchase the assets of the

existing law school and its receivables and has in

repeated written communications evinced a willingness to

indebt and encumber the existing school all the way to

insolvency in order to achieve its purpose.

Standards 204, 206, and 405: Already, every

aspect of the Charleston School of Laws functioning,

including the educational program, appears to be subject

to the management of the Infilaw organization, with little

or no input from faculty. The faculty has made repeatedly

clear its objections to the recent changes to the

admissions standards foisted upon the school by Infilaw.


3/11

Page 3 of 5

And yet those concerns have been ignored and numerous

students admitted whose admission credentials do not

meet with the standards deemed educationally and

ethically appropriate by the faculty. The faculty, the

contracts of whom Infilaw has expressly notcontemplated

acquisition, has effectively been stripped of all meaningfulgovernance and oversight of the academic program.

Further, both the tenured and non-tenured faculty have

reported directly to the Section the climate of employment

insecurity that has been created by Infilaws usurpation

in deed, if not in word, of administrative control at the

Charleston School of Law.

Standards 301, 501, and 503: Bar passage rates

at Infilaw schools have taken precipitous declines in

recent years, at the same time that the schools have made

admissions changes to accept larger and larger numbersof students whose admissions credentials demonstrate an

objectively low likelihood of success on the bar exam.

Since the announcement of its management services

agreement with the Charleston School of Law, Infilaw

appears to have suggested, if not required, a similar

change in the admissions standards of the Charleston

School of Law. Indeed, whereas Standard 301 makes bar

passage and participation in the legal profession the

overriding objective of the provision of legal education, in

internal communications forwarded by Infilawrepresentatives to current CSOL students, Infilaw has

made no secret of its plan to train a large segment of its

student population for jobs in which a law degree (as

opposed to bar passage) provides a potential employment

advantage. (Exhibit A Email from Annette Ritter to

Denise Sacco) This is neither in keeping with the letter or

the spirit of the Standard. Additionally, this body should

evaluate whether Infilaws implementation of its

AAMPLE admissions program at the Charleston School of

Law is a violation of Standard 503. This body previously

sanctioned Rutgers University Camden for analogousactions taken without prior approval.

Standard 510: In the August 13, 2014, issue of the

Atlantic magazine, Professor Paul Campos methodically

dissected Infilaws pursuit of an ever-expanding piece of

the student loan pie. Paul Campos, The Law School Scam,

THE ATLANTIC (Aug. 13, 2014). Infilaws practice of


4/11

Page 4 of 5

counseling vulnerable customers into becoming indebted

students should give pause to the ABA. Allowing Infilaw

to bring this practice to the Charleston School of Law

without further study would be irresponsible.

Standard 701: The small, densely populatedpeninsula of Charleston presents space challenges to any

school or business seeking to expand. Prior to the

announcement of the Infilaw transaction, the Charleston

School of Law had plans underway to construct a new

building for classrooms and administrative offices on land

the school purchased from the City of Charleston. Those

plans have been shelved, and it is our understanding that

the property cannot be transferred in Infilaw. In more

than a year since the transactions announcement, no

meaningful progress has been made to alleviate the space

and facilities concerns already present at the school.Nothing about the past year should give this Committee

confidence that sufficient progress will be made by Infilaw

in the future.

If, as has been suggested, an application for acquiescence in ownership

change has never been denied in the past, that fact is perhaps notable, but by no

means dispositive of what the Committees action should be in this case. In fact, to

acquiesce under the facts of this case would be unprecedented: in May 2014, a

committee of the South Carolina Commission on Higher Education, led by two

lawyers, voted to deny Infilaw a license to operate the Charleston School of Law,

and rather than face the almost certain prospect of a loss before the full

Commission, Infilaw withdrew its application. Infilaw has no license to operate any

school in South Carolina, much less this school. Never before has the ABA granted

any kind of license to an entity lacking the basic right to operate a school. Never

before has a change of ownership so clearly posed a choice between fealty to market

forces versus commitment to quality in legal education. Never before has a change

in ownership prompted such concerted public opposition.

Nor should the Committee be guided by the canard that the ABA-approval of

Infilaws other three schools should in any way bind the Committeesactions with

regard to this school; if Standard 101(b) has any meaning, the approvals ofCharlotte, Arizona Summit, and Florida Coastal do not confer some sort of

irrefutable conformity with the standards on this proposed transaction nor

inevitable entitlement to acquiescence. If anything, the issues raised by concerned

observers in the last fifteen months may call into question the present conformity of

the Infilaw schools to the Standards.


5/11

Page 5 of 5

The work of the Committee and of the Council is vitally important to

students who pursue legal education in this country and, ultimately, to those whose

legal needs will be met by those students. The parties seeking the acquiescence are

the only ones given a seat at the table to present their case; please do not conflate

the imposed absence of those who oppose the transaction with tacit approval. We

implore the Committee to be mindful of the well-being of these constituents whenevaluating the application before you. If you are guided by the Standards, you will

deny the request for major change acquiescence at this time.

Sincerely,

Charleston School of Law

Alumni Association Board of Directors

President

John E. Robinson

Vice PresidentCameron J. Blazer

Secretary

Megan Hunt Dell

Treasurer

James McCutchen

Wes Allison

Jacqueline Anthony

Marshall Matt AustinAshley Batson

Scott Bischoff

Kathleen Chewning

Alissa Collins

Daniel J. Crooks

Lauren Ellison

Christy Fargnoli

Robert Trey Harrell, III

Jennifer HillsMichelle McMahon

Mary Jordan Lempesis

Lauren Spears

Jenny Stevens

Sarah Woodard

Aimee Zmroczek

Enclosure: Exhibit AEmail from Annette Ritter to Denise Sacco


6/11

Matthew Kelly

Fwd: FW: Curriculum Committee recommendation of course program forCenter for Law Practice Technology1 message

Adrian Wilkes Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:13 AMTo: Matthew Kelly

Adrian E. Wilkes

Juris Doctor Candidate

Senator, Student Bar Association

Charleston School of Law, Class of 2016

The Citadel, Class of 2011

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Peter Goplerud Date: Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 11:50 AMSubject: FW: Curriculum Committee recommendation of course program for Center for Law Practice TechnologyTo: "[email protected] "

Adrian,

Here are the courses that were approved for the Center for Law Practice Technology.

Peter

From: Annette Ritter

Sent:Thursday, September 05, 2013 12:09 PM

To: Faculty (Full-Time Expanded)

Cc:Denise Sacco

Subject:FW: Curriculum Committee recommendation of course program for Center for Law Practice Technology

Faculty Members,

The Curriculum Committee will be presenting a proposal before the faculty at next Thursdays faculty meetingrecommending approval of the ten-course curriculum for the Center for Law Practice Technology, which can leadto a Certificate in Law Practice Technology and Management. The curriculum is based in large part on RichardSusskinds book, Tomorrows Lawyers: An Introduction to Your Future, Bill Hendersons Article, A Blue Print forChange, and Justice, Lawyering and the Legal Education in the Digital Age authored by Richard Granat and

Exhibit A
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.amazon.com/Tomorrows-Lawyers-Introduction-Your-Future/dp/019966806X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1377889945&sr=1-1&keywords=richard+susskind%3Bs+book%2C+tomorrow%27s+lawyershttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2202823http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2202823http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2202823http://www.amazon.com/Tomorrows-Lawyers-Introduction-Your-Future/dp/019966806X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1377889945&sr=1-1&keywords=richard+susskind%3Bs+book%2C+tomorrow%27s+lawyersmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


7/11

Stephanie Kimbro. Richard Granat and Stephanie Kimbro will be the co-directors of the Center as well as affiliatefaculty at Coastal. They have provided a brief overview of this program below (in red). Additionally, the CourseProposals for all ten (10) courses have been attached as well as Terri Davlantes Proposal for a Certificate in LawPractice Technology and Law Practice Management which Terri disseminated before the August faculty meeting.

The Curriculum Committee has reviewed the Course Proposals, conferenced with both Richard Granat andStephanie Kimbro, requested detailed course objectives, explanations of how the courses tie together and differ,verification of rigor in each course and questioned how frequently the courses should be offered. After completing

this process, the Curriculum Committee unanimously voted in favor of these ten courses as a unified curriculumfor the Center for Law Practice Technology with one exception. The Committee voted that all ten (10) courses beoffered once per year. This way the courses can be offered more frequently, but need not be offered everysemester depending on enrollment, faculty availability, etc.

If you have any questions, suggestions or concerns, please feel free to let me and the Committee membersknow.

There are four themes or goals underlying the design of the program:

1. Focus on solo and small law firm practice

2. A second focus on increasing employability of students for entry level positions in larger legal organizations,domestically and internationally, clustered around careers which require a JD degree plus skills in technology andmanagement

3. A nation-wide distance learning program

4. Appeal to international students for certain courses.

Theme 1: Focus on Solo and Small Law Practice

1. Students who graduate from Coastal need to be ready to go into practice for themselves as solo

or small practitioners because their employment prospects may be dismal and only a relatively small

percentage of Coastal students will get jobs in law firms. The purpose of the core course, Law

Practice Technology and Management, is to prepare law students for this reality by empowering

them to create a business plan that they can implement either immediately after graduation or within

a five year period after being admitted as a member of the Bar. This course stands alone. It's focus is

on solo and small law firm practice in the United States and is only peripherally related to the other

elective courses in the program. This course would be required for the Certificate Program.

Theme 2: New Careers in the Legal Profession.

2. Almost all of the elective courses train a student in a set of skills that are directly related to a job

role in a larger law firm, corporate legal department, consulting firm, or alternative provider such as

an outsourcing company or ediscovery provider. Each job role has a discrete job title with a discrete

sets of required skills. Each of the elective courses, has been designed to enable the student to add a

project to their portfolio which demonstrates skill acquisition. This will then qualify students for an

entry level position or higher within a larger legal organization. While it is difficult to predict


8/11

employment outcomes, the Centers goal is that the addition of skills in the digital arena will have an

impact on the students job prospects, giving Coastals students an edge in finding employment in

some of the fastest growing areas of the legal profession.

The elective courses falling under Theme 2 include:

a. Legal Document Automation potential job title: Document Automation Specialist.

b. Legal Expert Systems - Job title: Expert Systems Developer Legal Knowledge Engineer.

c. eDiscovery Management Job title: eDiscovery Manager- high demand for this position andjob title.

d. Legal Project Management Job title: Legal Project Manager manages projects in a varietyof legal settings- general counsels office large law firms outsourcing companies.

e. Legal Project Operations Job title: Legal Process Specialist Legal Productivity Specialist.

Recent literature on these subjects include:

http://www.digital-lawyer.com/document-automation-applications

http://www.digital-lawyer.com/expert-legal-systems

http://www.digital-lawyer.com/legal-process-re-design

Each of the job titles that link to the 5 elective courses above require distinctly unique skills. Eachcourse is a stand-alone course and may be taken independently to gain experience in that one area or incombination with the other courses proposed herein to meet the requirements for a Certificate in LawPractice Technology and Management.

The course in Access to Justice and Legal Technology in combination with one of the five courses

above is intended to increase the students employability with legal services programs, courts, andgovernment agencies. While these jobs are very limited, the number of professionals who have theseskills is also severely limited.

The course in Lawyers as Entrepreneurs is designed to orient the students to positions in venture-backed legal start-ups, in the US and internationally, (not law firm employment, but employmentrequiring a JD degree in a non-law firm context.). Unlike the core course which is oriented to solo andsmall law firm practice, this course prepares the student for employment in non-traditional legal entities,such as venture-backed legal start-ups.
http://www.digital-lawyer.com/legal-process-re-designhttp://www.digital-lawyer.com/expert-legal-systemshttp://www.digital-lawyer.com/document-automation-applications


9/11

The course in Ethics of Practicing Law in a Digital World compliments both Law PracticeTechnology and Management and Lawyers as Entrepreneurs. The Ethics course as it is a morefocused and deeper discussion of how the ABA Model Rules affect the development and implementationof technology in law firms and innovation in the legal profession and, includes a detailed examination ofethics opinions and cases that require analysis of the ABA Model Rules and the research conducted bythe ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20.

The course in Social Media for Lawyers is a specialized marketing course for students going into solo

practice as well as small law firms. In this course the students learns how to use social media to expandthe marketing reach of a law firm in an ethically compliant way. While social media might be mentioned,for example, when discussing marketing in Law Practice Technology and Management, this coursedives into issues with specific platforms, management tools, and privacy and security settings andmanagement.

Theme 3: Distance Learning Concept:

3. The third theme underlying the design of the program is that it will be offered to law students

nationwide, and perhaps eventually internationally, not just Coastal students. This is the rationale for

the distantlearning design. Only a handful of law schools offer courses like this in the United States

and the courses these schools offer are traditional classroom based courses. By offering a national ,

and international, program we have the possibility of creating a distinct brand for Coastal as a center

for legal technology and innovation. Moreover, a distant learning platform lends itself to recruiting

national and international faculty who are true thought leaders in their respective specialties.

Theme 4: International Reach

4. Preliminary conversations at the College of Law in London , and one or two other law schools, plusthe experience of the University of Miamis http://www.lawwithoutwalls.org/ suggests that there will beinternational demand for courses within the program, and demand for an international Certificate.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Annette J. Ritter

Associate Professor of Professional Skills

Florida Coastal School of Law

Director of Trial Practice &

Mock Trial

8787 Baypine Road

Jacksonville, Florida 32256
http://www.lawwithoutwalls.org/http://www.law.ac.uk/home/


10/11

904-680-7668 (office)

[email protected]

Education is the key to unlock

the golden door of freedom.

George Washington Carver

Annette J. Ritter

Associate Professor of Professional Skills

Florida Coastal School of Law

Director of Trial Practice &

Mock Trial

8787 Baypine Road

Jacksonville, Florida 32256

904-680-7668 (office)

[email protected]

Education is the key to unlock

the golden door of freedom.

George Washington Carver

12 attachmentsAccess to Justice and Legal Technology.docx74K

ediscovery_management_Final.docx105K

Ethics_of_Practicing_Law_in_a_Digital World_Final2.docx37K

Introduction to Law Practice Operations Management.docx43K

Law Practice Technology and Management_final3.docx
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.5&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.5&safe=1&zwhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.4&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.4&safe=1&zwhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.3&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.3&safe=1&zwhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.2&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.2&safe=1&zwhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.1&safe=1&zwmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


11/11

34K

Lawyers as E ntreprenuers_Final.docx

75K

Legal Document Automation.docx

86K

Legal_Expert_Systems_Final.docx85K

Project Management for Lawyers_Final.docx45K

Social Media in Law Practice_Final2.docx79K

Background_Courses_Design.docx55K

Memo to Faculty re Proposal to Create a CLPT.docx78K
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.12&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.12&safe=1&zwhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.11&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.11&safe=1&zwhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.10&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.10&safe=1&zwhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.9&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.9&safe=1&zwhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.8&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.8&safe=1&zwhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.7&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.7&safe=1&zwhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/1/?ui=2&ik=9bf654e528&view=att&th=141a814da1596e03&attid=0.6&disp=attd&realattid=df0fc8085747e244_0.6&safe=1&zw

Aba Letter Oct 2014

Documents

Transcript of Aba Letter Oct 2014