Unfortunately, it seems as though another law school is feeling the effects of the declining enrollment facing law schools across the country in recent years. George Kosko and Robert Carr, the owners of Charleston School of Law located in South Carolina, have recently announced that they might not enroll a new class of students this coming fall. The statement they put out read:

We cannot in good faith enroll another class when, like last year, the school is spending more money than is coming in; when we cannot assure the students that they will be able to use federal student loans for their full three years; and when we cannot be sure the school will be able to maintain its license and stay open

While this was not a formal announcement of closure, it does not look promising that the school is going to be able to turn things around.

Understandably, many of the students were shocked and confused by this news. The announcement came during the thick of finals season, a bizarre time to announce something that could rattle and greatly affect the futures of the school’s current students. Many students expressed that they were in disbelief that the administration would announce something of this magnitude during finals.

Other students expressed disappointment. Second-year law student Drew Waxler believed that he would finish his three years at Charleston School of Law and then head back home to Burlington, Vermont to start his career. However, it appears that his plans may have to change. He says that, “it is discouraging that you won’t have an alma mater to take pride in after graduation if they do decide to stop taking” new classes of students.

While many of the students were shocked by the news, the school has actually been in trouble since 2013 when its owners announced that a sale to the education company Infilaw was under consideration. At the time, many students and faculty members expressed their outrage with the sale. They explained how the three schools currently under Infilaw are of a lower caliber than Charleston. If the school were to become an Infilaw school, it would decrease the value of a Charleston Law degree. To the relief of many, the sale didn’t go through. However, it appears as though the process has done lasting damage to the school.

So, what does this mean for the students? According to the American Bar Association and state rules, a law school is not allowed to simply close its doors without doing anything for its students. If they decide to close, they will have to submit a “teach-out” plan that details how current students will finish their education programs. So, while certainly not ideal, at least the students can know that they won’t be left to figure things out for themselves.

The owners have stated that they expect to release a formal announcement at some point this week.

Brittany Alzfan

Brittany Alzfan is a student at the George Washington University majoring in Criminal Justice. She was a member of Law Street’s founding Law School Rankings team during the summer of 2014. Contact Brittany at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will This Law School Shut Down for Good? appeared first on Law Street.

Charleston Law School has had a tough few years. It was established in 2003–right when that big law school boom was starting– and its first class graduated in 2007. The school began as a way to fill a gap in legal education that existed in Charleston; despite the fact that it’s the second largest city in South Carolina, there was not a law school there when Charleston Law began operating.

In 2013, the school began dealing with a company called InfiLaw, which eventually purchased the school pending approval by the American Bar Association (ABA) and South Carolina’s commission on higher education.

InfiLaw is part of Sterling Enterprises, a private equity company from Chicago, and it operates for-profit law schools. Currently there are three in InfiLaw’s collection–Florida Coastal School of Law, Arizona Summit Law School, and the Charlotte School of Law. Charleston Law would be the fourth. The company’s reputation within the law school field isn’t particularly stellar. There are concerns that InfiLaw is a scam, and predatory–after all, it takes students who can’t get into other law schools, puts them into massive debt, and then those students have a very difficult time finding jobs that can pay off said debt. In an in-depth piece on for-profit law schools that focused heavily on InfiLaw, the Atlantic attempted to pinpoint the company’s motivation:

A Florida Coastal faculty member who is familiar with the business strategies of private-equity firms told me that, in his view, the entire InfiLaw venture was quite possibly based on a very-short-term investment perspective: the idea was to make as much money as the company could as fast as possible, and then dump the whole operation onto someone else when managing it became less profitable.

Regardless of whether or not those are actually InfiLaw’s practices, actually taking over Charleston Law could lead to serious changes at the school.

That’s where this all gets very, very messy. Those two entities that have to approve the sale–the ABA, and the South Carolina Commission on Higher Education (CHE)–have a few different moving parts. It’s a confusing mess, but essentially what’s happened is that one committee of the ABA, the accreditation committee, has approved the sale; however, another part that needs to give its approval, the Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar, has deferred making a decision. They’re waiting on the CHE, who have their own set of problems with which to contend.

Now CHE is caught in the middle. One of Charleston Law’s founders, a man named Ed Westbrook, doesn’t want the school sold to InfiLaw. He’s in the minority, as the other two founders want to see it go to InfiLaw. Westbrook claims that he can successfully operate it as a non-profit, without taking any money from the state. He’s made vague statements about using his own money to do so. Now, both Westbrook and his lawyers, and InfiLaw and its lawyers are reaching out to the CHE with conflicting proposals and information. Westbrook’s optimism is admirable, I guess, but Charleston Law as it stands seems a bit like a sinking ship. For example, the school’s new President, Maryann Jones stepped down in November. She lasted in the job for a grand total of eight days. Her reasoning was described in an email she sent when she resigned:

The level of vitriol, with all sides making me a lightning rod for an unfortunate situation that was not of my making, makes this truly a situation that I am unwilling at this stage of my life to undertake.

Back to the CHE approval though, which appears to be the lynchpin to this deal. Want to be even more confused? There are 15 seats on the CHE. Four are vacant, and eight are being held by people whose terms have technically expired. Governor Nicki Haley is trying to fill those seats–but that would be in January at the earliest.

So, will InfiLaw succeed in its takeover of the Charleston School of Law? I have absolutely no clue. This tangled web of players, committees, and arguments is a mess–perhaps symbolic of the messy relationship between the ABA, for-profit law schools, and students. Whatever happens, it’s now in the CHE’s hands…and I for one do not envy them.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post InfiLaw’s Attempt to Purchase Charleston Law is a Giant Mess appeared first on Law Street.

Both business and law school students across the country will almost undoubtedly learn about mergers and acquisitions inside the classroom. However, some students at the University of Maine are about to get some real world experience with these concepts. Plans to merge the university’s law and business degree programs were leaked last week in a report created by a group of concerned professors.

The details are still tentative. It’s unclear whether the university will simply consolidate the schools under one roof, or go so far as to have teachers and students from both schools combine to form an independent school with one dean. Despite these muddled, yet crucial specifics, Maine’s motivation to bring together these two schools is quite clear. With law school applicants dwindling amid high student debt and the depressingly crowded job market, schools are doing whatever they can to keep their law programs alive; even if that means being unconventional in an industry that prides itself on its traditional nature.

Admittedly, there are areas of overlap between law and business that could definitely be acceptable and beneficial to both. With the globalization trend that has continued to grow in the twenty-first century, it is no surprise that employers strongly desire the most well-rounded student. After all, the more skills and knowledge a student possesses, the more inherently valuable they are. Chief Executive Officer at the Bernstein Shur law firm in Portland, Pat Scully, showed his support for this initiative saying, “It will be easier for students to draw on the best of both offerings.” Working with business-minded faculty would allow future lawyers to gain insight and better relate to clients in ways that law professors simply aren’t accustomed to teaching.

But that is not the part with which the teachers find problems. They are concerned that during this planning process the teachers and students that will actually have to put the plans in motion are being ignored. This worry stems from the fact that the planning is being conducted by a third party, the Parthenon Group. Moving forward, it will definitely prove crucial how involved the educators are in this merger because they are the ones that will either accept it with open arms, or coldly reject and challenge this new system. In essence, however they are treated and react could either create a successful precedent and help remedy the current law school crisis, or just add to the list of ill-fated solutions already offered.

For example, the Charleston School of Law found itself in a similar crisis when it was discovered that their founders took out profits totaling $25 million in 2013. Recently, a presumed angel in the form of a company called the InfiLaw System, stepped in and offered to purchase the school. This would add to the other three for-profit law schools they have acquired. While many argue that InfiLaw is the only option to keep Charleston’s doors open, it seems in many ways the lesser of two evils. InfiLaw, like Charleston, is a for-profit company that builds other for-profit law schools; a characteristic that makes many students and community members wary of supporting the sale. They are are understandably skeptical of the school being handed off to another money-hungry group that will just put them back into the same situation. Other concerns stem from allegations that claim InfiLaw is a “diploma mill” with admission standards lower than normal because they are a profit driven organization.

These two solutions for keeping law school programs alive during this ongoing crisis provide insight on what seems to be a step in the right direction. The University of Maine has found a feasible resolution that actually predicts a positive outcome for students and may even help to set them ahead of the undeniable competition, especially from Ivy Leagues. On the other hand, schools like Charleston seem to be haphazardly throwing their programs into the hands of whomever will leave the school’s remaining founders with the optimal profit. Unfortunately, it seems in both cases the teachers and students are not being awarded the consideration they deserve as the heart of the system itself. This oversight that could prove fatal in both situations.

—

Erika Bethmann (@EBethmann) is a New Jersey native and a Washingtonian in the making. She is passionate about travel and international policy, and is expanding her knowledge of the world at George Washington University’s Elliot School of International Affairs. Contact Erika at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Jesse Michael Nix via Flickr]

Erika Bethmann

Erika Bethmann is a New Jersey native and a Washingtonian in the making. She is passionate about travel and international policy, and is expanding her knowledge of the world at George Washington University’s Elliot School of International Affairs. Contact Erika at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Law School Disruptor of the Week: University of Maine to Merge Law and Business appeared first on Law Street.