Former Charlotte Law Students Get Loan Discharge Extension
The U.S. Department of Education has extended the so-called closed-school discharge period, allowing more former Charlotte School of Law students to apply to wipe out their federal loans.
March 12, 2018 at 02:08 PM
4 minute read
|
An estimated 300 former students of the shuttered Charlotte School of Law will now be eligible to have their federal loans discharged.
The U.S. Department of Education on March 9 announced that it has extended the time period for former Charlotte students' eligibility under a rule that allows those enrolled at higher education institutions that shut down to walk away from their federal loans—what is known as a closed-school discharge.
“My focus is and will continue to be on doing what's right for individual students,” said Education Secretary Betsy DeVos in an announcement of the extension. “Several students, through no fault of their own, fell through the cracks as Charlotte School of Law closed. It's important that they too, are made whole.”
The closed-school discharge rule typically covers federal loan borrowers who were enrolled at the time of closure, or who withdrew no more than 120 days before their campus shut down. In the case of Charlotte, which officially closed down in August, only those who were enrolled at the time of closure or who left the school by April were eligible.
That meant the many students who left or took leaves of absence in January 2017—after the Education Department revoked the school's access to federal loans in response to problems with its American Bar Association accreditation—were not eligible to shed their federal loans.
Now, the closed-school discharge period will apply to any Charlotte student who withdrew on or after Dec. 31, 2016. The Education Department invoked a provision allowing it to extend the 120-day eligibility period under exceptional circumstances.
North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein requested the extension in April, when the eligibility of students who withdrew from the school prior to the start of the spring semester was set to expire. (Stein also launched an investigation into whether the school was violating state consumer protection laws.)
“A closed-school discharge represents a real chance for those students to make a fresh start,” he said in an announcement March 9. “I look forward to working with the U.S. Department of Education to ensure that all eligible former Charlotte School of Law students know how to take advantage of this option.”
Not everyone who attended Charlotte will be eligible for loan discharges, however. Students who transferred credits earned at Charlotte to another law school cannot walk away from their loans under the rule.
The Education Department informed Charlotte on Dec. 19, 2016, that it was ending it eligibility for federal student loans—a major blow to a law school already struggling to maintain its ABA accreditation. That move prompted a flood of students to withdraw or transfer to other schools.
Charlotte limped along throughout the spring 2017 semester, continually assuring remaining students that it was working to restore federal loan eligibility. The school arranged access to private loans for students in the interim.
The Education Department eventually released the federal loans for which the remaining students had already been approved at the start of the academic year, but only at the end of the spring semester. Some observers speculated that the delay was intended to prevent Charlotte from cashing the federal loan checks then immediately closing shop.
The law school finally threw in the towel in August, after the North Carolina University of North Carolina System's board of governors revoked its license to operate in the state.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'What Is Certain Is Uncertainty': Patchwork Title IX Rules Face Expected Changes in Second Trump Administration
5 minute read'No Evidence'?: Big Law Firms Defend Academic Publishers in EDNY Antitrust Case
3 minute readLaw Firms Are Turning to Online Training Platforms as Apprenticeship Model Falters
'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Increase in Artificial Intelligence-Related Securities Class Actions
- 2Trump’s DOE Pick Could Spell Trouble for Title IX Enforcement, Higher Ed Funding
- 3Jefferson Doctor Hit With $6.8M Verdict Over Death of 64-Year-Old Cancer Patient
- 4Seven Rules of the Road for Managing Referrals To/From Other Attorneys, Part 1
- 5What Went Wrong With Adeel Mangi's Long, Strange Trip Through the Judicial Nomination Process?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250