Should Fordham Law be Sued for Fraud? Forum

[Snooker]

I trust that others will shoot down any unsubstantiated assertions while I am gone.

160k median salary type assertions?

Doyle, you have seen the numbers. The school works with the best data available to calculate the median, and honestly explains the nature of said data (ie: 87% reporting.) Unless the school were to borrow some Death Eaters and put all new graduates under the Imperius curse, forcing them to reveal their starting salaries, there would be no way to get a "better" median.

The various tricks used to cook the books in admissions offices are very well known, from disqualifying certain data, losing addresses, or only including certain groups in the surveys. Why would Fordham suddenly be the great exception, the hard-working admissions office that inevitably produces the same dismal results as its dishonest colleagues? Why would NALP and NLJ be able to collect such accurate data about the whole market, but Fordham only be able to collect wildly skewed data about its own graduates?

There's reason to doubt this story. Fordham is no more honest than its lying peers.

[Snooker]

Orange I understand where you are coming from, but, I still don't believe that students at Fordham have legitimate standing to sue...

Not to contradict your eye roll!

I believe that it is bullshit as well, although, I am sure that under the ABA rules it is completely legal. I mean, if NYLS can report a median of 160k with 25% of students reporting and legitimize it, then, I am sure Fordham can do it :-/

Bringing up "ABA rules" here is incredibly interesting because the Department of Justice already successfully charged the ABA with anti-competitive practices financially exploiting law students with the intention of benefiting law school academia (1996). The ABA will allow it, because, as the DOJ found, their committees on law schools are already dominated by academics who are using dishonest practices to bilk us. I have no doubt the same practices are continuing in different directions, despite the court injunctions against several ABA practices.

The standing argument, I'm not really qualified to answer. I don't know if anything like this has even been tried before, but it's only been a topic for maybe 2 years now. Intuitively, I think most of us should be able to agree that providing falsified information with the intention of attracting investment is fraudulent. That alone should be enough to prompt controversy over the issue, prompt more research and more people taking strong stands.

Even if someone sued Fordham and failed, it'd be a bombshell rippling through the law school community. The school's reputation would be tarnished. Even if they are technically allowed to make these claims, the fact that they are doing something dishonest that has been widely exposed would ensure they have to pay for it.

[OperaSoprano]

Orange I understand where you are coming from, but, I still don't believe that students at Fordham have legitimate standing to sue...

Not to contradict your eye roll!

I believe that it is bullshit as well, although, I am sure that under the ABA rules it is completely legal. I mean, if NYLS can report a median of 160k with 25% of students reporting and legitimize it, then, I am sure Fordham can do it :-/

Bringing up "ABA rules" here is incredibly interesting because the Department of Justice already successfully charged the ABA with anti-competitive practices financially exploiting law students with the intention of benefiting law school academia (1996). The ABA will allow it, because, as the DOJ found, their committees on law schools are already dominated by academics who are using dishonest practices to bilk us. I have no doubt the same practices are continuing in different directions, despite the court injunctions against several ABA practices.

The standing argument, I'm not really qualified to answer. I don't know if anything like this has even been tried before, but it's only been a topic for maybe 2 years now. Intuitively, I think most of us should be able to agree that providing falsified information with the intention of attracting investment is fraudulent. That alone should be enough to prompt controversy over the issue, prompt more research and more people taking strong stands.

Even if someone sued Fordham and failed, it'd be a bombshell rippling through the law school community. The school's reputation would be tarnished. Even if they are technically allowed to make these claims, the fact that they are doing something dishonest that has been widely exposed would ensure they have to pay for it.

Snooker, I am out with an old friend, but I will make a full reply to you tonight. It occurred to me that we may paradoxically be on the same side of this argument. Many schools present the facts selectively, and I am as disgusted by the practice as you are. Fordham is not perfect, but I don't have any evidence that my school took part in anything dishonest. You've made some strong allegations about the manner in which Fordham collects data, and I would like to see your evidence for these claims.

As you must be aware, Fordham has the best or second best placement to be found outside the T18, depending upon the year. Unlike many other schools outside this elite group, it actually provides decent opportunities for students. I question your choice of Fordham as scapegoat.

Could the school improve? Certainly. Does it do a respectable job of placing graduates in top firms and public sector employment? Yes.

More to come.

[GATORTIM]

Should Fordham Law be Sued for Fraud?

......No, but if you do decide to file your lawsuit be sure to name every single LS in your complaint as all employment stats are deceptive in one way or another. Go Tom Watson!

Well in order for any school to be sued, you'd need to have a legitimate grievance with the school - i.e. you are a graduate making a 60k salary where the school said such an applicant would make 160k. There'd need to be actual damages in play, but I think that Fordham has exaggerated the economic gains for about a quarter of its class by $400,000 or more. The school defrauds its students by millions of dollars each year.

If, theoretically, angry Fordham graduates sued over this issue, re-litigating the same problem for other law schools would be a snap. It was really an enormous surprise to just everyone when, just two years ago, NALP released that bombshell study showing just how distended the distribution of law salaries is. It shocked one of President Bush's top economic advisor (on his blog commentary), but law schools were totally cognizant of this the whole time.

There's fraud going on here. If this doesn't become a lawsuit, at least serious criticism needs to be directed at the law schools engaging in this practice. ranks 18-70 or so, I imagine, have serious problems. TLS would be a good place for a "How Law Schools Defraud Students" type article. Many people are interested and many have a very good grasp of statistics and the game being played here. Moreover, since this mainly targets schools outside the Top 20, TLS' relationship wouldn't be hurt with the higher ranked, more honest law schools, including Texas and Vanderbilt which recently both released comprehensive and un-doctored employment statistics.

We must point out this is fraud, it is lying, and cheating law students out of millions yearly.

For OS:

Your best bet here in defending Fordham would not be the futile position of attempting to imply nothing wrong has been done here, but instead to show how Fordham is no worse than its peer institutions. I am sure the case can be made that Fordham is just another law school. In my opinion, they are the most extreme case of academic fraud - however, given the amount of data out there that hasn't been compared, I think you could overturn the assertion.

Fordham's students and faculty are top notch, and we can criticize the adminisration without implicating the world class faculty or bright students. Doing so would be an important step in reforming law school practices.

I started to read your post but then I stopped and just went on living my life.....

[Action Jackson]

Orange I understand where you are coming from, but, I still don't believe that students at Fordham have legitimate standing to sue...

Not to contradict your eye roll!

I believe that it is bullshit as well, although, I am sure that under the ABA rules it is completely legal. I mean, if NYLS can report a median of 160k with 25% of students reporting and legitimize it, then, I am sure Fordham can do it :-/

Bringing up "ABA rules" here is incredibly interesting because the Department of Justice already successfully charged the ABA with anti-competitive practices financially exploiting law students with the intention of benefiting law school academia (1996). The ABA will allow it, because, as the DOJ found, their committees on law schools are already dominated by academics who are using dishonest practices to bilk us. I have no doubt the same practices are continuing in different directions, despite the court injunctions against several ABA practices.

The standing argument, I'm not really qualified to answer. I don't know if anything like this has even been tried before, but it's only been a topic for maybe 2 years now. Intuitively, I think most of us should be able to agree that providing falsified information with the intention of attracting investment is fraudulent. That alone should be enough to prompt controversy over the issue, prompt more research and more people taking strong stands.

Even if someone sued Fordham and failed, it'd be a bombshell rippling through the law school community. The school's reputation would be tarnished. Even if they are technically allowed to make these claims, the fact that they are doing something dishonest that has been widely exposed would ensure they have to pay for it.

You're still pissed about that Fordham rejection, huh?

[Kohinoor]

Should Fordham Law be Sued for Fraud?

......No, but if you do decide to file your lawsuit be sure to name every single LS in your complaint as all employment stats are deceptive in one way or another. Go Tom Watson!

Well in order for any school to be sued, you'd need to have a legitimate grievance with the school - i.e. you are a graduate making a 60k salary where the school said such an applicant would make 160k. There'd need to be actual damages in play, but I think that Fordham has exaggerated the economic gains for about a quarter of its class by $400,000 or more. The school defrauds its students by millions of dollars each year.

If, theoretically, angry Fordham graduates sued over this issue, re-litigating the same problem for other law schools would be a snap. It was really an enormous surprise to just everyone when, just two years ago, NALP released that bombshell study showing just how distended the distribution of law salaries is. It shocked one of President Bush's top economic advisor (on his blog commentary), but law schools were totally cognizant of this the whole time.

There's fraud going on here. If this doesn't become a lawsuit, at least serious criticism needs to be directed at the law schools engaging in this practice. ranks 18-70 or so, I imagine, have serious problems. TLS would be a good place for a "How Law Schools Defraud Students" type article. Many people are interested and many have a very good grasp of statistics and the game being played here. Moreover, since this mainly targets schools outside the Top 20, TLS' relationship wouldn't be hurt with the higher ranked, more honest law schools, including Texas and Vanderbilt which recently both released comprehensive and un-doctored employment statistics.

We must point out this is fraud, it is lying, and cheating law students out of millions yearly.

For OS:

Your best bet here in defending Fordham would not be the futile position of attempting to imply nothing wrong has been done here, but instead to show how Fordham is no worse than its peer institutions. I am sure the case can be made that Fordham is just another law school. In my opinion, they are the most extreme case of academic fraud - however, given the amount of data out there that hasn't been compared, I think you could overturn the assertion.

Fordham's students and faculty are top notch, and we can criticize the adminisration without implicating the world class faculty or bright students. Doing so would be an important step in reforming law school practices.

broken_image

[MrOrange]

The notoriety may actually help her career, if curious employers elect to call her in for an interview.

wow

Its actually probably true. Its also what they said for that Suffolk Law grad... most of you have probably already seen this, but if not:
http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/when-e ... na-abdala/

This little exchange deserves more attention.

Why Fordham's stat-phrasing makes sense: because potentially posing nude on the internet isn't a big deal, either.

[Yimbeezy]

The notoriety may actually help her career, if curious employers elect to call her in for an interview.

wow

Its actually probably true. Its also what they said for that Suffolk Law grad... most of you have probably already seen this, but if not:
http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/when-e ... na-abdala/

This little exchange deserves more attention.

Why Fordham's stat-phrasing makes sense: because potentially posing nude on the internet isn't a big deal, either.

No, OS admitted it's a big deal. Curious employers will want to gain some insider knowledge of the girl.
Similarly, Fordham's statistical manipulation will make potential law students more interested in attending. It's all in good, competitive fun! (This is likely the argument Lewinsky would have made, but with Bill coming down [couldn't help myself], nobody really cared that she was using her lips to get ahead in the employment world of W.H. staff[again, lol].)

And for the record, I don't like the book cooking, and Fordham is guilty of it along with a lot of other law schools. It should all be public record. Then again, I think a lot of things should be public record that aren't.

We wouldn't want people to know things. It's much easier to profit when you hold knowledge back.

[Helmholtz]

Fordham's fine. Just have a rule of never trusting any school's self-reported info. In a perfect world, there would be a reputable third party taking care of this kind of stuff.

[Yimbeezy]

Fordham's fine. Just have a rule of never trusting any school's self-reported info. In a perfect world, there would be a reputable third party taking care of this kind of stuff.

Like Moody's?

[Helmholtz]

Fordham's fine. Just have a rule of never trusting any school's self-reported info. In a perfect world, there would be a reputable third party taking care of this kind of stuff.

Like Moody's?

If you thought that Moody's and other rating agencies were bad, just imagine how bad it would have been if corporations were allowed to assign themselves their own ratings and people took them at their word for it. A lot of the problems and incentives to twist data that the credit rating agencies saw wouldn't easily transfer over to law schools. But comparing all third parties who supposedly regulate industries to Moody's or other credit rating agencies is like saying that any company that offers stock is like Enron. Just because one group of regulatory agencies screwed up doesn't mean the concept is without merit.

[Yimbeezy]

Fordham's fine. Just have a rule of never trusting any school's self-reported info. In a perfect world, there would be a reputable third party taking care of this kind of stuff.

Like Moody's?

If you thought that Moody's and other rating agencies were bad, just imagine how bad it would have been if corporations were allowed to assign themselves their own ratings and people took them at their word for it. A lot of the problems and incentives to twist data that the credit rating agencies saw wouldn't easily transfer over to law schools. But comparing all third parties who supposedly regulate industries to Moody's or other credit rating agencies is like saying that any company that offers stock is like Enron. Just because one group of regulatory agencies screwed up doesn't mean the concept is without merit.

+1. It was tongue-in-cheek. I actually agree with you 100%. And as with Moody's, I think the solution is for another 3rd party (see: the government) to regulate and prevent the groups that profit from selling the services from interacting closely with the groups that profit from calculating risk.

In context with my other post a couple previous to our exchange, I think a lot more information should be public record. It creates competition to most accurately inform people with thorough public data and furthermore allows the consumer to bypass information agencies altogether if they should choose to do so.

[geoanthem]

Wow, I missed a lot while I was away for the weekend...

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Wow, I missed a lot while I was away for the weekend...

Lies. I haven't seen you post in months.

[geoanthem]

Wow, I missed a lot while I was away for the weekend...

Lies. I haven't seen you post in months.

Umm, I last posted July 16...

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Wow, I missed a lot while I was away for the weekend...

Lies. I haven't seen you post in months.

Umm, I last posted July 16...

Evidence and Facts have no place in this thread!!

[danquayle]

I've said it ad nauseum --> universities out to be treated more like businesses. Just like public companies have to report their financial accounting, law schools ought to be compelled to fully account for their students.

Of course, the problem is that these schools would still exploit these loopholes. Until there is some formal and effective regulation, these schools will never faithfully report employment statistics. Some tier 1 needs to get hard with serious sanctions to get the rest of the schools to fall in line.

[geoanthem]

Wow, I missed a lot while I was away for the weekend...

Lies. I haven't seen you post in months.

Umm, I last posted July 16...

Evidence and Facts have no place in this thread!!

True story. I'm going to Fordham and excited about it. Continue on with the debate though, I don't really feel like getting into it.

Edit: If we really want to talk about a school cooking the books, why not pick somewhere like Tulane that reports 37% of the classes' salary information? Just saying...

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I love big government. Government needs to take care of people and the mistakes they might make.

[Bankhead]

Haven't read the thread but I was always under the impression that Fordham was admirable for the transparency of its employment stats and thus a bad example of this type of thing.

[danquayle]

I love big government. Government needs to take care of people and the mistakes they might make.

No, not at all. I'm not talking about the government per se. I was talking more about the ABA self-sanctioning a la how the NCAA does. Its eventually going to result in the dilution of the entire legal field such that it isn't a individual problem, but rather a systemic problem. I think you could easily argue that part of the reason the legal field is getting hit so hard right now from top to bottom is the saturation of the legal market. That saturation is a direct result of this poor reporting. It gives potential law students an overly optimistic view of their career options. Would there be a clearer picture, from top to bottom, the demand for a legal education would abate.

Besides, regulation that provides for punitive recourse isn't necessarily big government. It could easily mean giving private actors access to more self-help remedies. Such provisions just alter the flow of capitalism, not dictate it. One of the major flaws in economic theory in general is asymmetric information. I don't know how you can construe ameliorating that problem as a furtherance of big government. if anything, it benefits the free market.

[Kohinoor]

I love big government. Government needs to take care of people and the mistakes they might make.

No, not at all. I'm not talking about the government per se. I was talking more about the ABA self-sanctioning a la how the NCAA does. Its eventually going to result in the dilution of the entire legal field such that it isn't a individual problem, but rather a systemic problem. I think you could easily argue that part of the reason the legal field is getting hit so hard right now from top to bottom is the saturation of the legal market. That saturation is a direct result of this poor reporting. It gives potential law students an overly optimistic view of their career options. Would there be a clearer picture, from top to bottom, the demand for a legal education would abate.

Besides, regulation that provides for punitive recourse isn't necessarily big government. It could easily mean the giving private actors self-help remedies.

You clearly don't understand what a direct result is.

[danquayle]

I love big government. Government needs to take care of people and the mistakes they might make.

No, not at all. I'm not talking about the government per se. I was talking more about the ABA self-sanctioning a la how the NCAA does. Its eventually going to result in the dilution of the entire legal field such that it isn't a individual problem, but rather a systemic problem. I think you could easily argue that part of the reason the legal field is getting hit so hard right now from top to bottom is the saturation of the legal market. That saturation is a direct result of this poor reporting. It gives potential law students an overly optimistic view of their career options. Would there be a clearer picture, from top to bottom, the demand for a legal education would abate.

Besides, regulation that provides for punitive recourse isn't necessarily big government. It could easily mean the giving private actors self-help remedies.

You clearly don't understand what a direct result is.

Maybe not. But please explain your point.

[Helmholtz]

On a related note, Ohio Northern only had 3% of their grads report their salary information and the median was still only $58,000.


Poor Ohio Northern.

[98234872348]

Evidence and Facts have no place in law school salary statistics!!

Fixed.