Student Leader Letter to CHE Opposing Infilaw Licensure

7/29/2019 Student Leader Letter to CHE Opposing Infilaw Licensure

1/4

1

September10,2013

ReneaEshleman

ActingDirector

AcademicAffairsandLicensingDivision

SCCommissiononHigherEducation

1122LadyStreet,Ste.300Columbia,SC29201

viaemail

DearMs.Eshleman:

Asstudentleadersof theCharlestonSchoolofLawsprimaryscholasticandoraladvocacy

organizations, we write to formally express our opposition to Infilaw Corporations

impendingapplicationforlicensuretoassumeownershipandoperationoftheCharleston

SchoolofLaw.WesharetheconcernsandsentimentsexpressedbytheAlumniAssociation

BoardofDirectorsintheirrecentletter,andwearelikewisestronglyopposedtothegrant

ofanysuchlicense.

Ourorganizations have alreadyfelt theeffectsof theproposedsale to Infilaw, anout-of-

statecorporationlargelyownedbyaprivatehedgefundwithnodiscernableconnectionto

South Carolina. The Law Reviews feel these effects as we struggle to recruit academic

authorsforourjournals,perhapsbecauseoftheseprospectiveauthorslegitimateconcerns

regarding the overall reputation of Infilaw schools, especially with regards to faculty

independenceandscholarshipattheseschoolsgenerally.Wearehavingtomakedowith

drasticallylowermembershipnumbersbecauseof thehighnumberof top-flightstudents

whotransferreduponhearingthenewsofapartnershipwithInfilaw.1Andweworkdailyto

assureourcurrentmembersthattheirworkhasvalue,eveninthefaceofsuchuncertainty

regardingthefutureofourschool.

As an agency charged with consumer protection in higher education, we urge you to

seriously consider the track record of the existing schools in the Infilaw network. The

enteringclasssizesandhighlevelsofacademicattritionattheseschools2evinceamodel

that isbasednoton selectivityin admissions andcommitment toeducationalexcellence,

but on profit. By that same turn, Infilaws marketing tactics, such as the direct offer of

scholarshipmonies to thosewhohavemerely registered forthe LSAT, areakin to credit

cardsolicitationsandothertypesofjunkmail.Seriousacademicinstitutionsdonotrecruit

prospective students in such amanner. For these reasons and many others, the Infilaw

modelisinconsistentwiththemissionoftheSCCHE,whichischarged,underTitle59ofthe

South CarolinaCodeof Laws, withpromoting "high academicquality"and "instructional

excellence.SuchamodelisalsonotconsistentwiththeoriginalpurposeoftheCharleston

1Manyofthesestudents,incidentally,departedforout-of-statelawschools,aregrettablefact

consideringthatthevastmajorityofstudentswhograduatefromtheCharlestonSchoolofLawstay

inthisstatetopractice.2Whenquestionedaboutthesestatisticsbyoneauthorofthisletter,InfilawrepresentativePeter

Goplerudclaimedthatsuchnumberswereinaccurate,despitethefactthatthesewerethevery

numbersprovidedtotheAmericanBarAssociationbytheschoolsthemselves.Todate,hehasnot

followeduptoprovidemoreaccuratedata.


2/4

2

School of Law, a school purportedly founded on public service ideals by leading local

practitionersandjuristswhosawthestatesneedforadifferenttypeoflegaleducation.We

firmly believe that the Infilaw model, if it is allowed to take root in this state, will

impoverishthequalityoflegaleducationandthereforethequalityoflegalservicesavailable

tothecitizensofSouthCarolina.

SCCHEconcernsabouttheultimatefateoftheCharlestonSchoolofLawarenothingnew.Infact, at least one member of the Commission, during the period of initial licensure,

expressedhishopethattheCharlestonSchoolofLawwouldremaintruetotheauspices

underwhich itwas being considered for licensure.3According to the minutes of a 2003

Commissionmeeting, thatmember indicatedthat hehadheard of a similarsituation in

Floridarecentlywithaschoolsoldtoanotherentity.Heexpressedhopethatthisschool[the

CharlestonSchoolofLaw]wasnotbeingorganizedtosellatalaterdate.Thatschoolwas

Florida Coastal, and that entity was Infilaw. Judges Carr and Kosko, now a two-person

majority on the schools Board of Directors, have indicated in their conversations with

studentsandalumnithattherehasbeenalong-standingrelationshipwithInfilawandthe

InfilawschoolssincethefoundingoftheCharlestonSchoolofLaw.Iftrue,suchafactcalls

into serious question the representations made by some founders in their original

application for licensure. Themembers of theSCCHEwereproperly concernedwith the

possiblemotivetolaterselltheCharlestonSchoolofLawtoanentitysuchasInfilawthen,

andshouldbesimilarlywaryoftheproposalunderconsiderationnow.

But motives are of course only one indicia of the suitability of the proposed Infilaw

licensure.Alsopertinentaretheconcreteactions,orinactions,ofcertainDirectorsinfailing

toproperlyandtimelyinformtheSCCHEoftheiragreementswithInfilaw.Wenowknow,

thankstothereleaseofdocumentsbyyouragencylastThursday,thattheSCCHEwasnot

madeawareof theexistenceofa contingentassetpurchaseagreementuntiloveramonth

afteritwas executed.This delaycameabout despite the fact that during this same time

period theSCCHEstaffwasin regularcommunicationwith thoseDirectorsregardingthe

ManagementServicesAgreement(MSA).

Representatives from Infilawhave repeatedly stated that the cityof Charleston, and the

stateofSouthCarolinaasawhole,aredifferentmarketsthanthoseinwhichtheirother

schoolsoperate,andthattheywillbesensitivetothatfactinsettingclasssizes.However,if

Infilawisgrantedlicensure,whatwillhappenwhen,notif,thestatebar,inordertoavoida

floodingofthemarket,pushesbackonthenumberofbarapplicantstheywillallowina

given year? Will Infilaw reduce class sizes accordingly? If not, who will hold them

accountable?Iftheydoreduceclasssizescommensuratewiththismarketrestriction,will

Infilawbeabletomaketheprofittowhichtheyareaccustomed?Andifnot,whatistostop

themfromauctioningoff this underperformingassetto thehighestbidder?Giventhese

legitimatequestions,weweregratifiedtoseeChairmanFinansrecentcommentsindicating

thattheCommissionwilltakea seriouslookatitsrolenotonlyinfor-profitlicensure,butalsoinpost-licensureperformance.Thisinquiryisessential,notonlyfortheprotectionof

currentand prospective students,but forthosegraduateswhose degreesrepresent their

educationalinvestment.

Wewould like to thankyou for the work that your agency has already undertaken,and

especially appreciate theadditional informationyoumadeavailableonyourwebsite last

3http://www.che.sc.gov/AcademicAffairs/License/CSOL/3-2003-09-04_CHE-Minutes.pdf.


3/4

3

Thursday.However,manyquestionsstillremain.Weurgeyoutocontinuetopressfor,and

tomake available, the redacted information from both the MSA and the redemption of

membership interest documents, as well as for the release of the full contingent asset

purchase agreement. Without this information, your agency cannot understand the true

outlinesoftheproposeddeal,andcannot fullyexecute itsdutiesunderlaw.By thatsame

token, we appreciate your recent statements indicating that an extended timeline for

licensure consideration, as opposed to Infilawandamajorityof theDirectors preferredtimeline,maybewarrantedinthe interestsof acomprehensivereviewand inlightofthe

needforadditionaldisclosures.Charleston School of Law students are a proud group: proud of our faculty who give

selflesslytoensureoursuccess,proudofwhatwehaveseenouralumniaccomplish,and

proudofourfellowstudentswhentheyachieve.Weknowwearea younginstitution,and

thatthereismuchworkyettobedone.ButmanyofuschosetheCharlestonSchoolofLaw

because of, not in spite of, this fact. That is precisely why the actions taken by certain

Directors have seriously wounded the spirit of our community. A sense of betrayal,

mistrust, anddisappointment nowpermeates ourcampus. Inwritingto you,we hopeto

inspirestudentstorecognizethatsuchfeelings,whileunderstandable,arenotproductive.

Whilediscussionsregardingalternativepathwaysfortheschoolsfutureareappropriately

beingledbythosewiththeresourcesandconnectionstoseriouslypursuesuchpossibilities,

wefirmlybelieve that studentshavean essential role toplay, and voices that shouldbe

heard, indecisions regarding ourschools future.Whilewearenot shareholders,weare

important stakeholders, and the path forward demands accountability, honesty, and

sincerityfromallinvolved.

It iswith thesepositive goals in mind thatweurge students to standup for what they

believeandmaketheiropinionsknowntorepresentativesintheGeneralAssemblyandto

theCommission.Likewise,asstudentleadersdedicatedtorepairingthecommunitythatwe

love sodearly,weoffer ourselves to the Commission aspartners committed tothe best

interestsoftheCharlestonSchoolofLaw.Wewouldwelcometheopportunitytoprovideyou with further information or to appear before the Commission or the licensing

committeeatfuturemeetings.Wewillbecloselymonitoringtheworkofallgovernmental

entitieswithaninterestintheseproceedings,includingtheOfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral,

theGeneralAssembly,andofcourse,thisbody.Thankyouagainforyourcarefulattention

tothismatter.

Sincerely,

DerekM.Bush

President,TrialAdvocacyBoard

LeighEllenGray

EditorinChief,CharlestonLawReview

CoreyB.Shipley

EditorinChief,MaritimeLawBulletin(MALABU)

JescelynS.Tillman

EditorinChief,FederalCourtsLawReview


4/4

4

cc: Dr.RichardC.Sutton,ExecutiveDirectorSCCHE

CHECommitteeonAcademicAffairsandLicensing

CharlestonCountyLegislativeDelegation

Student Leader Letter to CHE Opposing Infilaw Licensure

Documents

Transcript of Student Leader Letter to CHE Opposing Infilaw Licensure