In a suit claiming Widener University School of Law misled prospective students about future job prospects, the plaintiffs are seeking to strike the school’s expert reports because they draw upon internal documents that were not produced in discovery.
The suit asserts that Widener’s claims of post-graduate employment rates greater than 90 percent failed to distinguish between legal employment and non-legal jobs such as bartending. The plaintiffs asked a federal judge in Newark to strike two expert reports submitted by Widener on the issue of class certification. But Widener disputed the claims about non-production of records and said the plaintiffs’ allegations ignore their own conduct in violating a discovery confidentiality order.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
