Search the Lounge


« Eighth Annual Brigham-Kanner Property Rights Conference | Main | Happy Birthday Dodd-Frank »

July 20, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Alfred Brophy

What do you make of this, Gary? What's the significance of failing to appeal and immediately re-applying? Does this prevent La Verne from challenging the ABA standards subsequently?

Gary Rosin

I'm not sure what it all means. If La Verne wanted to challenge the ABA, an appeal would have been the way to go. It's hard to challenge the Standards when you're standing at the door, hat in hand, asking to come inside.

The fact that the Council waived the 10-month rule to allow La Verne to reapply immediately may mean something. But what that something is, is not clear to me. But then, I've never served on a site evaluation team, much less on one of the Section's committees, so I'm not a reliable reader of tea leaves on this.

Alfred Brophy

Thanks for this, Gary -- I don't know how the ABA accreditation process works, so my concern (like yours) is that by not appealing, La Verne may have acquiesced in the standards regarding bar pass rate.

Gary Rosin

As I discuss in La Verne's Reapplication Hints in Accreditation Committee Response to Senator Grassley, there is precedent in the form of Western State. With luck, La Verne may not lose too much time or too many current, and potential, students.

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad