DOJ says LSAT is discriminatory
The federal government is supporting a discrimination lawsuit against the organization that administers the Law School Admission Test (LSAT).
September 07, 2012 at 06:38 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The federal government is supporting a discrimination lawsuit against the organization that administers the Law School Admission Test (LSAT).
Yesterday, lawyers for the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a motion to intervene in a class action in which a group of law school hopefuls accuses the Law School Admission Council (LSAC), which administers the LSAT, of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to accommodate test takers with disabilities.
In its motion, the DOJ claims the LSAC improperly flags tests completed with accommodations, thus identifying disabled test takers and implying “that examinees who exercise their civil right to the testing accommodation of extended time may not deserve the scores they received.”
The LSAC denies the accusations and is moving to dismiss the lawsuit.
This isn't the first time that LSAT takers have claimed the test discriminates against individuals with disabilities. In June, a blind law school candidate sued the American Bar Association, claiming the LSAT violates the ADA, and last December, a New York woman with a cognitive disability sued the LSAC for not giving her an extension to take the exam.
Read more InsideCounsel stories about disability-related laws and lawsuits:
The federal government is supporting a discrimination lawsuit against the organization that administers the Law School Admission Test (LSAT).
Yesterday, lawyers for the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a motion to intervene in a class action in which a group of law school hopefuls accuses the Law School Admission Council (LSAC), which administers the LSAT, of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to accommodate test takers with disabilities.
In its motion, the DOJ claims the LSAC improperly flags tests completed with accommodations, thus identifying disabled test takers and implying “that examinees who exercise their civil right to the testing accommodation of extended time may not deserve the scores they received.”
The LSAC denies the accusations and is moving to dismiss the lawsuit.
This isn't the first time that LSAT takers have claimed the test discriminates against individuals with disabilities. In June, a blind law school candidate sued the American Bar Association, claiming the LSAT violates the ADA, and last December, a
Read more InsideCounsel stories about disability-related laws and lawsuits:
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
Beyond the Title: Developing a Personal Brand as General Counsel
Step 1 for Successful Negotiators: Believe in Yourself
Deluge of Trump-Leery Government Lawyers Join Job Market, Setting Up Free-for-All for Law Firm, In-House Openings
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
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
