Cooley Sues Law Firm and Bloggers Forum

[Verity]

I'm reporting all of you ITT to Cooley's legal team so that you all can be added to the lawsuit....

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[mattviphky]

83% acceptance rate?! "They're slightly less selective than the burger king kids club." snl

[bouakedojo]

.

[jarofsoup]

Cooley.......I can't say anything bad about the place. Really I am terrified of being sued.

[SchopenhauerFTW]

Cooley.......I can't say anything bad about the place. Really I am terrified of being sued.

You should only be terrified if you're a graduate of their school and love to speak poorly of them every chance you get.

[NotMyRealName09]

You know, I've dogged on Cooley plenty online - Cooley is generally a terrible law school, and their graduates are generally terrible to practice against - and this certainly won't help their reputation. You can mock their calling themselves the #2 law school all day, we know they are full of shit, but there is no objective measure of a "ranking."

But if you say that their students have an "astounding" 41% default rate, and that they are under investigation by the Department of Education for student loan fraud, that goes from mere mocking to straight up "you'd better have a cite for that."

If I go around saying "Joe Smith is being investigated by the cops for raping children," that is actionable. I need at least some basis in fact for that statement.

You can say Cooley sucks. But you can't say Cooley rapes kids an astounding 41% of the time unless Cooley does, in fact, rape kids 41% of the time. (Perhaps metaphorically, they rape some kids, but those kids shouldn't have dressed like that, and some of them wanted it).

Defamation is defamation. The suit against the law firm settles for $$$, bet.

[Glock]

You know, I've dogged on Cooley plenty online - Cooley is generally a terrible law school, and their graduates are generally terrible to practice against - and this certainly won't help their reputation. You can mock their calling themselves the #2 law school all day, we know they are full of shit, but there is no objective measure of a "ranking."

But if you say that their students have an "astounding" 41% default rate, and that they are under investigation by the Department of Education for student loan fraud, that goes from mere mocking to straight up "you'd better have a cite for that."

If I go around saying "Joe Smith is being investigated by the cops for raping children," that is actionable. I need at least some basis in fact for that statement.

You can say Cooley sucks. But you can't say Cooley rapes kids an astounding 41% of the time unless Cooley does, in fact, rape kids 41% of the time. (Perhaps metaphorically, they rape some kids, but those kids shouldn't have dressed like that, and some of them wanted it).

Defamation is defamation. The suit against the law firm settles for $$$, bet.

Only if you know it to be false and you are doing it to harm their reputation. Making shit up and blathering about it is not illegal in itself. Think National Enquirer- their outlandish shit gets them sued occasionally and they almost never lose.

Libel and defamation suits go nowhere in the US. The law firm used pretty careful language with allegedly and such. That will be a tough suit to win. Cooley is just trying to slow down the bitching about them by scaring people. Good luck Cooley!

[Bless]

Others are less kind.

I'm ROFLZZZZZ @ that blog's story on Cooley.

"And look, the school has FOUR campuses throughout the State of Michigan. Oh joy! The main pile is located in Lansing, with waste sites in Grand Rapids, Auburn Hills, and a new campus in Ann Arbor. (It’s akin to having four rolls of toilet paper to wipe your ass with!)"

ROFLZZZZ

The school is ranked 12th by its own law school rankings scheme!

http://www.nationaljurist.com/content/c ... s-one-team

Well, at least the school is seeking to attract more students via advertising. Apparently, a total enrollment of 3783 students is not a large enough pool of victims for this school to claim. They have decided to spend $1.485 million, over 11 years, on the naming rights to a minor league baseball park. (Maybe that will help move Cooley up in US&NWR’s rankings. It should at least help the school climb the ladder in its own rankings scheme.)"

LMAOOOOOOOO DEAD.

[brose]

I should have posted this earlier: --LinkRemoved--

I like that they're doing it on Craigslist - where most Cooley grads are looking for jobs. Good for them!

[bjsesq]

bou!!!

Em! <3

Do you own Chicago now?

Hello, sexy. How's those Michigan winters?

Sup, bitches?

[ToTransferOrNot]

You know, I've dogged on Cooley plenty online - Cooley is generally a terrible law school, and their graduates are generally terrible to practice against - and this certainly won't help their reputation. You can mock their calling themselves the #2 law school all day, we know they are full of shit, but there is no objective measure of a "ranking."

But if you say that their students have an "astounding" 41% default rate, and that they are under investigation by the Department of Education for student loan fraud, that goes from mere mocking to straight up "you'd better have a cite for that."

If I go around saying "Joe Smith is being investigated by the cops for raping children," that is actionable. I need at least some basis in fact for that statement.

You can say Cooley sucks. But you can't say Cooley rapes kids an astounding 41% of the time unless Cooley does, in fact, rape kids 41% of the time. (Perhaps metaphorically, they rape some kids, but those kids shouldn't have dressed like that, and some of them wanted it).

Defamation is defamation. The suit against the law firm settles for $$$, bet.

Only if you know it to be false and you are doing it to harm their reputation. Making shit up and blathering about it is not illegal in itself. Think National Enquirer- their outlandish shit gets them sued occasionally and they almost never lose.

Libel and defamation suits go nowhere in the US. The law firm used pretty careful language with allegedly and such. That will be a tough suit to win. Cooley is just trying to slow down the bitching about them by scaring people. Good luck Cooley!

Bolded is incorrect. If Cooley's placement and such is a "matter of public concern" or Cooley is a "public figure" then "reckless disregard" (i.e. you know that you aren't certain of the truth/falsity of the statement and you haven't researched it) of whether the statement is true is enough. And motive is 100% irrelevant to anything aside from punitive damages.

If Cooley's placement isn't a matter of public concern, then depending on the state, the statements only need to have been negligently or there is essentially strict liability.

Not sure which branch they'd have to fall into, but your statement is wrong either way.

The reason that tabloids and such don't lose libel cases more often is that they're always talking about public figures - so the higher standard applies - and the language is frequently "not defamatory" in that they aren't "factual statements" or "inferences from factual statements."

If the more stinging allegations (under investigation 41% default rate) aren't actually true, yeah, that law firm is going to be settling for $$$.

[taxguy]

I am not a Cooley fan,but starting this law suit was VERY clever. Why? There are several reasons:
1. The best defense is a good offense. They saw the writing on the wall that the law firm was probably intending to bring a class action suit against them. This way, they nip this immediately and stop the potential suit.
2. Secondly the get great publicity from this, particularly if they win.
3. They put a chill on any unsupported negative factual comments about Cooley. This will certainly have the effect of reducing a lot of the negative comments and naysayers.

Bottom line: Whatever your opinion of Cooley,it really was a clever move. The only potential downside would be if the law firm can indeed prove its case regarding Cooley. That would be a huge public embarrassment for the law school. Even worse, if the law firm can prove that its alledged factual allegations were true, they would have one heck of a good class action case not to mention could affect Cooley's accreditation. Thus, it is a bit of a crap shoot by the law school. However, my opinion is that they made the right move in instituting this suit.

All that is great and all. But I'm fairly sure you can't serve process to "anonymous persons" via the internet. This is not a serious suit, it's a publicity stunt. Although it would be hilarious if they tried to give the defendants notice through a PM or something.


Yes, you are right;however, they can sue TLS and get discovery of names and addresses of posters.

[ndirish2010]

Others are less kind.

I'm ROFLZZZZZ @ that blog's story on Cooley.

"And look, the school has FOUR campuses throughout the State of Michigan. Oh joy! The main pile is located in Lansing, with waste sites in Grand Rapids, Auburn Hills, and a new campus in Ann Arbor. (It’s akin to having four rolls of toilet paper to wipe your ass with!)"

ROFLZZZZ

The school is ranked 12th by its own law school rankings scheme!

http://www.nationaljurist.com/content/c ... s-one-team

Well, at least the school is seeking to attract more students via advertising. Apparently, a total enrollment of 3783 students is not a large enough pool of victims for this school to claim. They have decided to spend $1.485 million, over 11 years, on the naming rights to a minor league baseball park. (Maybe that will help move Cooley up in US&NWR’s rankings. It should at least help the school climb the ladder in its own rankings scheme.)"

LMAOOOOOOOO DEAD.

Never read third tier reality before? Every article is the same.

[SchopenhauerFTW]

Yes, you are right;however, they can sue TLS and get discovery of names and addresses of posters.

What?

[kazu]

Yes, you are right;however, they can sue TLS and get discovery of names and addresses of posters.

What?

[Verity]

Yes, you are right;however, they can sue TLS and get discovery of names and addresses of posters.

Damn. I shouldn't have given my name and address to TLS.

Taxguy, thank you for this.

[bouakedojo]

.

[bjsesq]

I love the new tar.

I love your face.

[bouakedojo]

.

[bjsesq]

I love the new tar.

I love your face.

It's because I have a purdy mouth.

Well, yeah. Even with the cold sores, it is beautiful.

[bouakedojo]

.

[bjsesq]

Shhh. Don't out me, bro. I don't want the Cooley lawsuit to read, "The anonymous poster with herpes."

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Yes, you are right;however, they can sue TLS and get discovery of names and addresses of posters.

Damn. I shouldn't have given my name and address to TLS.

Taxguy, thank you for this.

Unless you're using a fake IP address every time you log into TLS or TLS doesn't log ip addresses (like autoadmit supposedly doesn't or at least I remember the site claiming not to have in relation to the lawsuit involving those two girls), then TLS would give up your IP address and your IP would give up your name and address.

[SchopenhauerFTW]

TLS has your IP.

[loblaw]

TLS has your IP.

With the Cooley flavored haterade so many on this site are sipping, it kind of makes you wonder why they didn't try to go after any TLS posters.