Tax Law Prof Blog has the news. I'm not too versed in all the details of the suit and the relevant laws that were applied in the case. The quoted portions of the judge's ruling don't square with my recollection of how fraud statutes were applied back in the days when I was a plaintiffs-side antitrust and business tort lawyer.
It is my understanding that the law suits in California had proceeded to discovery, so it remains to be seen what effect this ruling will have. The plaintiffs in the New York suit have promised to appeal, so my seat-of-the-pants guess is that the ruling will incent law schools not to settle and will continue to encourage a new era of statistical disclosure.
If the alumni of a law school sue the school claiming that the education was a bit of a joke - and they lose - how does that leave the equities of the claim?
Yes, I know that the claim was for lack of work, not fitness for work, but still. . .
Posted by: Trotsky | March 30, 2012 at 05:42 PM