CHARLESTON SCHOOL OF LAW ALUMNI ASSOCIATION

BOARD OF DIRECTORS



October 28, 2014

Barry A. Currier
Managing Director
Section of Legal Education
American Bar Association
321 North Clark Street
Chicago, IL 60654

Thomas C. Galligan, Jr., President
Colby-Sawyer College
541 Main Street
New London, New Hampshire 03257

Professor Joan Howland, Associate Dean and Professor
University of Minnesota Law School
229 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455

ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar
321 N. Clark Street, 21st Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60654

RE: Request for Major Change Acquiescence by Charleston
School of Law

Dear Mr. Currier, President Galligan, and Dean Howland:

While there can be little doubt that the Accreditation
Committee of the Section of Legal Education is well aware of the
overwhelming student, faculty, and alumni opposition to any
acquiescence to Infilaws plan to take over the Charleston School
of Law, please allow this correspondence to summarize the
specific concerns of the more than 1,000 alumni constituents we
represent. These concerns overlap with those of the
supermajority of the faculty, which has made a written record of
its opposition to acquiescence, as well as an overwhelming
number of current students, more than 125 of whom have taken
breaks from briefing cases and Bluebooking law review articles
President
John E. Robinson
Vice President
Cameron J. Blazer
Secretary
Megan Hunt Dell
Treasurer
James McCutchen

Members
Wes Allison
Jacqueline Anthony
Marshall Matt Austin
Ashley Batson
Scott Bischoff
Kathleen Chewning
Alissa Collins
Daniel J. Crooks
Lauren Ellison
Christy Fargnoli
Robert Trey Harrell, III
Jennifer Hills
Michelle McMahon
Mary Jordan Lempesis
Lauren Spears
Jenny Stevens
Sarah Woodard
Aimee Zmroczek
Page 2 of 5
and gaining experience through externships to write in opposition to acquiescence.
As the Committee and the Section consider Infilaws proposal, we trust that
each member will be mindful of the important role the ABA plays in ensuring the
quality of the educational programs at each approved law school. The United States
Department of Education has delegated to the ABA the duty and authority to vet
the quality of programs of study at each approved law school; this is the only means
of determining which schools will be eligible to receive the federally backed student
loan fundsfunds without which no law school in this country could function.
Especially in this era of increased media, community, and governmental attention
to the short-and-long-term costs of education, scrutiny is justly placed on every
school, whether public or private, and accrediting bodies like the ABA to ensure
schools do not abuse the public trust in accessing this enormous source of capital. At
the same time, we are mindful of the narrow perch from which the ABA must
conduct its oversight in light of the ever-present threat of antitrust litigation
surrounding your exercise of this duty.
In navigating this nearly untenable landscape, the Committee and the
Council are to be guided by the ABA Standards and Rules of Procedure for Approval
of Law Schools. While these standards include limited specific guidance regarding
acquiescence to major changes, inherent in any acquiescence must be a finding that
the adherence to standards at the school seeking acquiescence will not recede in the
wake of such acquiescence. And yet, in this case, that is precisely the concerna
concern which is supported by objective facts about Infilaws management of the
three schools it already owns.
While not an exhaustive list, the following standards are at risk of violation
at the Charleston School of Law in the event of the proposed change in ownership:
Standard 201: Rather than demonstrate a
commitment to the financial stability of the Charleston
School of Law, since its arrival on the campus, Infilaw has
made clear that it seeks to purchase the assets of the
existing law school and its receivables and has in
repeated written communications evinced a willingness to
indebt and encumber the existing school all the way to
insolvency in order to achieve its purpose.
Standards 204, 206, and 405: Already, every
aspect of the Charleston School of Laws functioning,
including the educational program, appears to be subject
to the management of the Infilaw organization, with little
or no input from faculty. The faculty has made repeatedly
clear its objections to the recent changes to the
admissions standards foisted upon the school by Infilaw.
Page 3 of 5
And yet those concerns have been ignored and numerous
students admitted whose admission credentials do not
meet with the standards deemed educationally and
ethically appropriate by the faculty. The faculty, the
contracts of whom Infilaw has expressly not contemplated
acquisition, has effectively been stripped of all meaningful
governance and oversight of the academic program.
Further, both the tenured and non-tenured faculty have
reported directly to the Section the climate of employment
insecurity that has been created by Infilaws usurpation
in deed, if not in word, of administrative control at the
Charleston School of Law.
Standards 301, 501, and 503: Bar passage rates
at Infilaw schools have taken precipitous declines in
recent years, at the same time that the schools have made
admissions changes to accept larger and larger numbers
of students whose admissions credentials demonstrate an
objectively low likelihood of success on the bar exam.
Since the announcement of its management services
agreement with the Charleston School of Law, Infilaw
appears to have suggested, if not required, a similar
change in the admissions standards of the Charleston
School of Law. Indeed, whereas Standard 301 makes bar
passage and participation in the legal profession the
overriding objective of the provision of legal education, in
internal communications forwarded by Infilaw
representatives to current CSOL students, Infilaw has
made no secret of its plan to train a large segment of its
student population for jobs in which a law degree (as
opposed to bar passage) provides a potential employment
advantage. (Exhibit A Email from Annette Ritter to
Denise Sacco) This is neither in keeping with the letter or
the spirit of the Standard. Additionally, this body should
evaluate whether Infilaws implementation of its
AAMPLE admissions program at the Charleston School of
Law is a violation of Standard 503. This body previously
sanctioned Rutgers University Camden for analogous
actions taken without prior approval.
Standard 510: In the August 13, 2014, issue of the
Atlantic magazine, Professor Paul Campos methodically
dissected Infilaws pursuit of an ever-expanding piece of
the student loan pie. Paul Campos, The Law School Scam,
THE ATLANTIC (Aug. 13, 2014). Infilaws practice of
Page 4 of 5
counseling vulnerable customers into becoming indebted
students should give pause to the ABA. Allowing Infilaw
to bring this practice to the Charleston School of Law
without further study would be irresponsible.
Standard 701: The small, densely populated
peninsula of Charleston presents space challenges to any
school or business seeking to expand. Prior to the
announcement of the Infilaw transaction, the Charleston
School of Law had plans underway to construct a new
building for classrooms and administrative offices on land
the school purchased from the City of Charleston. Those
plans have been shelved, and it is our understanding that
the property cannot be transferred in Infilaw. In more
than a year since the transactions announcement, no
meaningful progress has been made to alleviate the space
and facilities concerns already present at the school.
Nothing about the past year should give this Committee
confidence that sufficient progress will be made by Infilaw
in the future.
If, as has been suggested, an application for acquiescence in ownership
change has never been denied in the past, that fact is perhaps notable, but by no
means dispositive of what the Committees action should be in this case. In fact, to
acquiesce under the facts of this case would be unprecedented: in May 2014, a
committee of the South Carolina Commission on Higher Education, led by two
lawyers, voted to deny Infilaw a license to operate the Charleston School of Law,
and rather than face the almost certain prospect of a loss before the full
Commission, Infilaw withdrew its application. Infilaw has no license to operate any
school in South Carolina, much less this school. Never before has the ABA granted
any kind of license to an entity lacking the basic right to operate a school. Never
before has a change of ownership so clearly posed a choice between fealty to market
forces versus commitment to quality in legal education. Never before has a change
in ownership prompted such concerted public opposition.
Nor should the Committee be guided by the canard that the ABA-approval of
Infilaws other three schools should in any way bind the Committees actions with
regard to this school; if Standard 101(b) has any meaning, the approvals of
Charlotte, Arizona Summit, and Florida Coastal do not confer some sort of
irrefutable conformity with the standards on this proposed transaction nor
inevitable entitlement to acquiescence. If anything, the issues raised by concerned
observers in the last fifteen months may call into question the present conformity of
the Infilaw schools to the Standards.
Page 5 of 5
The work of the Committee and of the Council is vitally important to
students who pursue legal education in this country and, ultimately, to those whose
legal needs will be met by those students. The parties seeking the acquiescence are
the only ones given a seat at the table to present their case; please do not conflate
the imposed absence of those who oppose the transaction with tacit approval. We
implore the Committee to be mindful of the well-being of these constituents when
evaluating the application before you. If you are guided by the Standards, you will
deny the request for major change acquiescence at this time.
Sincerely,

Charleston School of Law
Alumni Association Board of Directors

President
John E. Robinson
Vice President
Cameron J. Blazer
Secretary
Megan Hunt Dell
Treasurer
James McCutchen

Wes Allison
Jacqueline Anthony
Marshall Matt Austin
Ashley Batson
Scott Bischoff
Kathleen Chewning
Alissa Collins
Daniel J. Crooks
Lauren Ellison
Christy Fargnoli
Robert Trey Harrell, III
Jennifer Hills
Michelle McMahon
Mary Jordan Lempesis
Lauren Spears
Jenny Stevens
Sarah Woodard
Aimee Zmroczek

Enclosure: Exhibit A Email from Annette Ritter to Denise Sacco
MatthewKelly<mzkelly@charlestonlaw.edu>
Fwd:FW:CurriculumCommitteerecommendationofcourseprogramfor
CenterforLawPracticeTechnology
1message
AdrianWilkes<aewilkes@charlestonlaw.edu> Fri,Oct11,2013at11:13AM
To:MatthewKelly<mzkelly@charlestonlaw.edu>
AdrianE.Wilkes
JurisDoctorCandidate
Senator,StudentBarAssociation
CharlestonSchoolofLaw,Classof2016
TheCitadel,Classof2011
Forwardedmessage
From:PeterGoplerud<pgoplerud@fcsl.edu>
Date:Tue,Oct1,2013at11:50AM
Subject:FW:CurriculumCommitteerecommendationofcourseprogramforCenterforLawPracticeTechnology
To:"aewilkes@charlestonlaw.edu"<aewilkes@charlestonlaw.edu>
Adrian,
HerearethecoursesthatwereapprovedfortheCenterforLawPracticeTechnology.
Peter
From:AnnetteRitter
Sent:Thursday,September05,201312:09PM
To:Faculty(FullTimeExpanded)
Cc:DeniseSacco
Subject:FW:CurriculumCommitteerecommendationofcourseprogramforCenterforLawPracticeTechnology
FacultyMembers,
TheCurriculumCommitteewillbepresentingaproposalbeforethefacultyatnextThursdaysfacultymeeting
recommendingapprovalofthetencoursecurriculumfortheCenterforLawPracticeTechnology,whichcanlead
toaCertificateinLawPracticeTechnologyandManagement.ThecurriculumisbasedinlargepartonRichard
Susskindsbook,TomorrowsLawyers:AnIntroductiontoYourFuture,BillHendersonsArticle,ABluePrintfor
Change,andJustice,LawyeringandtheLegalEducationintheDigitalAgeauthoredbyRichardGranatand
Exhibit A
StephanieKimbro.RichardGranatandStephanieKimbrowillbethecodirectorsoftheCenteraswellasaffiliate
facultyatCoastal.Theyhaveprovidedabriefoverviewofthisprogrambelow(inred).Additionally,theCourse
Proposalsforallten(10)courseshavebeenattachedaswellasTerriDavlantesProposalforaCertificateinLaw
PracticeTechnologyandLawPracticeManagementwhichTerridisseminatedbeforetheAugustfacultymeeting.

TheCurriculumCommitteehasreviewedtheCourseProposals,conferencedwithbothRichardGranatand
StephanieKimbro,requesteddetailedcourseobjectives,explanationsofhowthecoursestietogetheranddiffer,
verificationofrigorineachcourseandquestionedhowfrequentlythecoursesshouldbeoffered.Aftercompleting
thisprocess,theCurriculumCommitteeunanimouslyvotedinfavorofthesetencoursesasaunifiedcurriculum
fortheCenterforLawPracticeTechnologywithoneexception.TheCommitteevotedthatallten(10)coursesbe
offeredonceperyear.Thiswaythecoursescanbeofferedmorefrequently,butneednotbeofferedevery
semesterdependingonenrollment,facultyavailability,etc.

Ifyouhaveanyquestions,suggestionsorconcerns,pleasefeelfreetoletmeandtheCommitteemembers
know.

Therearefourthemesorgoalsunderlyingthedesignoftheprogram:

1.Focusonsoloandsmalllawfirmpractice
2.Asecondfocusonincreasingemployabilityofstudentsforentrylevelpositionsinlargerlegalorganizations,
domesticallyandinternationally,clusteredaroundcareerswhichrequireaJDdegreeplusskillsintechnologyand
management
3.Anationwidedistancelearningprogram
4.Appealtointernationalstudentsforcertaincourses.
Theme1:FocusonSoloandSmallLawPractice
1.StudentswhograduatefromCoastalneedtobereadytogointopracticeforthemselvesassolo
orsmallpractitionersbecausetheiremploymentprospectsmaybedismalandonlyarelativelysmall
percentageofCoastalstudentswillgetjobsinlawfirms.Thepurposeofthecorecourse,Law
PracticeTechnologyandManagement,istopreparelawstudentsforthisrealitybyempowering
themtocreateabusinessplanthattheycanimplementeitherimmediatelyaftergraduationorwithin
afiveyearperiodafterbeingadmittedasamemberoftheBar.Thiscoursestandsalone.It'sfocusis
onsoloandsmalllawfirmpracticeintheUnitedStatesandisonlyperipherallyrelatedtotheother
electivecoursesintheprogram.ThiscoursewouldberequiredfortheCertificateProgram.
Theme2:NewCareersintheLegalProfession.
2.Almostalloftheelectivecoursestrainastudentinasetofskillsthataredirectlyrelatedtoajob
roleinalargerlawfirm,corporatelegaldepartment,consultingfirm,oralternativeprovidersuchas
anoutsourcingcompanyorediscoveryprovider.Eachjobrolehasadiscretejobtitlewithadiscrete
setsofrequiredskills.Eachoftheelectivecourses,hasbeendesignedtoenablethestudenttoadda
projecttotheirportfoliowhichdemonstratesskillacquisition.Thiswillthenqualifystudentsforan
entrylevelpositionorhigherwithinalargerlegalorganization.Whileitisdifficulttopredict
employmentoutcomes,theCentersgoalisthattheadditionofskillsinthedigitalarenawillhavean
impactonthestudentsjobprospects,givingCoastalsstudentsanedgeinfindingemploymentin
someofthefastestgrowingareasofthelegalprofession.
TheelectivecoursesfallingunderTheme2include:
a.LegalDocumentAutomationpotentialjobtitle:DocumentAutomationSpecialist.
b.LegalExpertSystemsJobtitle:ExpertSystemsDeveloperLegalKnowledgeEngineer.
c.eDiscoveryManagementJobtitle:eDiscoveryManagerhighdemandforthispositionand
jobtitle.
d.LegalProjectManagementJobtitle:LegalProjectManagermanagesprojectsinavariety
oflegalsettingsgeneralcounselsofficelargelawfirmsoutsourcingcompanies.
e.LegalProjectOperationsJobtitle:LegalProcessSpecialistLegalProductivitySpecialist.

Recentliteratureonthesesubjectsinclude:

http://www.digitallawyer.com/documentautomationapplications

http://www.digitallawyer.com/expertlegalsystems

http://www.digitallawyer.com/legalprocessredesign

Eachofthejobtitlesthatlinktothe5electivecoursesaboverequiredistinctlyuniqueskills.Each
courseisastandalonecourseandmaybetakenindependentlytogainexperienceinthatoneareaorin
combinationwiththeothercoursesproposedhereintomeettherequirementsforaCertificateinLaw
PracticeTechnologyandManagement.

ThecourseinAccesstoJusticeandLegalTechnologyincombinationwithoneofthefivecourses
aboveisintendedtoincreasethestudentsemployabilitywithlegalservicesprograms,courts,and
governmentagencies.Whilethesejobsareverylimited,thenumberofprofessionalswhohavethese
skillsisalsoseverelylimited.

ThecourseinLawyersasEntrepreneursisdesignedtoorientthestudentstopositionsinventure
backedlegalstartups,intheUSandinternationally,(notlawfirmemployment,butemployment
requiringaJDdegreeinanonlawfirmcontext.).Unlikethecorecoursewhichisorientedtosoloand
smalllawfirmpractice,thiscoursepreparesthestudentforemploymentinnontraditionallegalentities,
suchasventurebackedlegalstartups.

ThecourseinEthicsofPracticingLawinaDigitalWorldcomplimentsbothLawPractice
TechnologyandManagementandLawyersasEntrepreneurs.TheEthicscourseasitisamore
focusedanddeeperdiscussionofhowtheABAModelRulesaffectthedevelopmentandimplementation
oftechnologyinlawfirmsandinnovationinthelegalprofessionand,includesadetailedexaminationof
ethicsopinionsandcasesthatrequireanalysisoftheABAModelRulesandtheresearchconductedby
theABACommissiononEthics20/20.

ThecourseinSocialMediaforLawyersisaspecializedmarketingcourseforstudentsgoingintosolo
practiceaswellassmalllawfirms.Inthiscoursethestudentslearnshowtousesocialmediatoexpand
themarketingreachofalawfirminanethicallycompliantway.Whilesocialmediamightbementioned,
forexample,whendiscussingmarketinginLawPracticeTechnologyandManagement,thiscourse
divesintoissueswithspecificplatforms,managementtools,andprivacyandsecuritysettingsand
management.

Theme3:DistanceLearningConcept:
3.Thethirdthemeunderlyingthedesignoftheprogramisthatitwillbeofferedtolawstudents
nationwide,andperhapseventuallyinternationally,notjustCoastalstudents.Thisistherationalefor
thedistantlearningdesign.OnlyahandfuloflawschoolsoffercourseslikethisintheUnitedStates
andthecoursestheseschoolsofferaretraditionalclassroombasedcourses.Byofferinganational,
andinternational,programwehavethepossibilityofcreatingadistinctbrandforCoastalasacenter
forlegaltechnologyandinnovation.Moreover,adistantlearningplatformlendsitselftorecruiting
nationalandinternationalfacultywhoaretruethoughtleadersintheirrespectivespecialties.
Theme4:InternationalReach

4.PreliminaryconversationsattheCollegeofLawinLondon,andoneortwootherlawschools,plus
theexperienceoftheUniversityofMiamishttp://www.lawwithoutwalls.org/suggeststhattherewillbe
internationaldemandforcourseswithintheprogram,anddemandforaninternationalCertificate.

Thankyouforyourattentiontothismatter.

Annette J. Ritter
AssociateProfessorofProfessionalSkills
FloridaCoastalSchoolofLaw
DirectorofTrialPractice&
MockTrial

8787BaypineRoad
Jacksonville,Florida32256
9046807668(office)
aritter@fcsl.edu

Educationisthekeytounlock
thegoldendooroffreedom.
GeorgeWashingtonCarver

Annette J. Ritter
AssociateProfessorofProfessionalSkills
FloridaCoastalSchoolofLaw
DirectorofTrialPractice&
MockTrial

8787BaypineRoad
Jacksonville,Florida32256
9046807668(office)
aritter@fcsl.edu

Educationisthekeytounlock
thegoldendooroffreedom.
GeorgeWashingtonCarver

12attachments
AccesstoJusticeandLegalTechnology.docx
74K
ediscovery_management_Final.docx
105K
Ethics_of_Practicing_Law_in_a_DigitalWorld_Final2.docx
37K
IntroductiontoLawPracticeOperationsManagement.docx
43K
LawPracticeTechnologyandManagement_final3.docx
34K
LawyersasEntreprenuers_Final.docx
75K
LegalDocumentAutomation.docx
86K
Legal_Expert_Systems_Final.docx
85K
ProjectManagementforLawyers_Final.docx
45K
SocialMediainLawPractice_Final2.docx
79K
Background_Courses_Design.docx
55K
MemotoFacultyreProposaltoCreateaCLPT.docx
78K