Arizona Summit Sues ABA Over Accreditation, Joining Two Other For-Profit Schools
All three for-profit law schools owned by InfiLaw Corp. now have sued the ABA over accreditation actions it has taken against them.
May 24, 2018 at 04:40 PM
4 minute read
Arizona Summit Law School sued the American Bar Association in federal court Thursday, alleging that its law school accrediting arm violated the school's due process when it was put on probation last year for violating admissions rules.
It's the third time in as many weeks that the for-profit law school consortium InfiLaw Corp. has filed suit against the ABA over sanctions imposed on its schools, and yet again the company has turned to a trio of high-profile attorneys at Kirkland & Ellis that includes Paul Clement and Viet Dinh.
“The ABA's accreditation standards inherently are vague, indeterminate, and subject to manipulation,” said Arizona Summit president Don Lively in an announcement of the suit filed in Arizona federal district court. “They constitute an open invitation for subjectivity, bias, and double standards in their application—abuses that we have experienced first-hand and are precisely what due process protects against.”
Barry Currier, the ABA's managing director of accreditation and legal education, could not be reached for comment on the suit Thursday. But Currier has said previously that the ABA will defend its accreditation activities in court.
“Courts have regularly upheld the ABA's law school accreditation process,” he said. “We will continue to follow our established procedures and expect to be successful in any future litigation challenging the actions of the council.”
InfiLaw kicked off the wave on litigation on May 10 when its Florida Coastal School of Law sued, claiming the ABA is punishing the school despite the fact that its bar pass rates exceed those at many others schools that have not been targeted by the ABA.
Next up was a suit on behalf of the now defunct InfiLaw-owned Charlotte School of Law filed May 15 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, which charged that the ABA's uneven enforcement of its accreditation standards led the U.S. Department of Education to cut the school off from the federal loan program in late 2016. The school was never able to recover from losing federal loan eligibility and it closed in August 2017.
The latest suit on behalf of Arizona Summit is similar to the first two. It also claims that the ABA's law school accreditation standards are vague and not applied consistently across schools. It also alleges, as did Charlotte and Florida Coastal, that the ABA was acting under pressure from officials within the Education Department to target for-profit institutions with accreditation enforcement.
The ABA put the Phoenix school on probation in March 2017 for low bar pass rates, its admissions practices, and its academic support. Earlier this year, the ABA also found the school out of compliance with its financial standards.
Just 20 percent of Arizona Summit graduates passed the February 2018 Arizona bar exam. That figure was also 20 percent for the previous exam in July 2018.
“The ABA deliberately has turned a blind eye to our achievements, mission, and results–which include bar examination performance that at times has led the state and, despite a recent decline, remains consistent with nationwide trends and in compliance with accreditation standards,” said interim Dean Penny Willrich in the announcement of the suit.
In addition to the three InfiLaw schools, the ABA is also being sued by Western Michigan University Thomas Cooley Law School after it was found out of compliance with the accreditation standards. The ABA found in March that the school had taken steps to come back into compliance with its rules.
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 AllUChicago Law Professors Release Desk Reference Breaking Down Crypto, Web 3 for Attorneys
4 minute readDean Developments: 2 Law Schools Appoint New Leadership, ABF Elects New Fellow
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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