Dismissed from T14, want to go back to law school Forum

[ben4847]

Finally, Desert Fox, stop posting. You're such a shitty poster and a nasty, nerdy, unlikeable person. Jesus Christ, you post so much on TLS. I don't normally like saying things like that to people, but God you're terrible. I want to know who you are in real life at some point. I've heard rumors about who you are, but I don't know for sure.

Desert Fox is a friend of a friend of mine. I don't know who it is though. I don't even know this particular friend's handle. But I'm good with any friend of his. (Although, I don't know that desert fox would say the same about me, hee hee.)

[rayiner]

Ah, you're every bit as charming as I remember. The "rumors" are probably true, since everyone in the 2L class knows. They also don't care. Whether you find DF likable or not, he gets along well with pretty much everyone, probably due to his sense of humor. Though I realize you would never understand that.

You "realize" I would never understand that because you don't actually know me. And I hope his real life "sense of humor" is completely different from the weird Rommel-fetishist annoying internet meme 15,000-posting moron persona he's cultivated on this forum. I'm not a jerk. I'm nice and get along with everybody too. I just think Desert Fox sucks, unless his real life persona is really completely different from his online one.

Whether what happened to your friend is justified or not, his posts are dripping with self-deception. He is going to have to figure out how to not sound like that in real life to the C&F committee.

I think C&F won't be a problem for him. It's getting into a T14 that might be hard for him, though I think he'll be fine for that too.

And I understand what you're saying about his posts maybe dripping with self-deception, but what if he is right about everything? It's extremely hard not to sound like you're deceiving yourself even when you are right about everything. Imagine being him and having the whole school hear all these ridiculous rumors about him, most of which aren't true at all, and some of which are distortions of the truth, and having everybody believe them immediately--on top of being expelled from law school. He's taken things pretty well considering how horrible the past couple of months have been for him. Even I started to believe some of the rumors about him that were being told by his former friends before another mutual friend, a TLS poster, made me realize how horrible I was being by not giving him the benefit of the doubt. I still feel bad about that.

Even if you don't believe any of the rumors, all you have to do is read between the lines of his post to see how he's trying to spin it in his future applications. C&F doesn't want spin, they want disclosure. And you can sure as hell bet he'll be sitting down for a conversation with C&F. If he's penitent and forthcoming, they'll just give him a scare. It's actually very hard to get C&F-dinged on the substance of your file, but much easier to get dinged for not being absolutely straightforward with your disclosure.

[sunynp]

Wow. I thought the event OP was talking about happened a couple of years ago. I think OP should delete all his stuff if he can. He doesn't need this thread following him around with all the other baggage he's got. I think OP has a long way to go to sort out his issues, and posting on a public forum where he will be easily known to other posters is a symptom of poor and self-destructive judgement. I still wish you well OP, and I still think you should work on your other career instead of hanging on to the dream of law.

I hope this thread can stay useful about C&F and disclosure and not devolve into [redacted name of law school] bickering. It doesn't look good for anyone to post that stuff. And I am not from [redacted name]! It looks bad you guys, just FYI.

edit to add

I would be very surprised if this thread hadn't come to the attention of the Dean. I am regretting posting in this thread and I'm not from [redacted school] You have to assume that if OP is easy to identify that this has gotten back to the school. OP: You don't want this thread to come up in some way and be used against you. This information isn't priveleged and could be sent to any t14 school you applied to through a simple copy and past. OP - you need to be more careful. I think that advice might apply to OPs former classmates as well.

[dontbeanidiot]

.

[dontbeanidiot]

.

[09042014]

The dean argues that admissions revocation requires no hearings or appeals, no need for an opportunity to review any of their evidence, and that he is essentially exempt from any due process requirements in the factual determination of nondisclosure because I was never a valid student, while that very determination is the basis for rescinding my acceptance and claiming I was never a valid student.

I will say, even if all the rumors were true (and I have no way to tell either way), this is Bullshit on the part of the Dean. Unless, they refund all your tuition(and probably even if they did). Because the revocation has real consequences.

(I removed my first post but the moral is disclose everything, no matter how trivial it seems, even if you are unsure if it's in the scope of the application question).

Make sure you follow your own advice. I'd make sure to include every allegation the dean had against you, even if it seems like he dropped it. Because of the first failure to disclose, the bar people will what you like a hawk the second time around. You are definitely going to get investigated by C&F.

And schools will be hesitant to admit you if they think you are holding back on why you got dismissed the first time. If your story seems incomplete they will likely assume you are withholding again.

Putting all your cards on the table is the only way you get through this. And to be honest, I'm not sure a reputable school will take you for a while.

[CanadianWolf]

Seems similiar to "at-will employment".

[dontbeanidiot]

.

[dresden doll]

Also everybody stop tell him he's not taking responsibility for things. I'm his friend and former classmate in real life and I think he's handling it pretty well.

Sorry, but we have nothing beyond his posts ITT to go off of. And those posts definitely indicate a certain degree of responsibility evasion. Every time OP has referred to his failure to disclose his juvenile stint, he's extensively discussed 6 other applications whose questions did not require such information. Talking about how other applications didn't care about his juvenile stint is completely irrelevant: since NU has no obligation to tailor its questions so they're no more stringent than any other school's, conducting such comparisons only amounts to attempts to justify what ultimately amounts to a blunder on his end.

I wish OP no harm, but do think that, in the final analysis, he alone is responsible for his predicament.

[dresden doll]

Oh yeah you were the one being a tool about not getting into Harvard. Glad you made some friends here.

[dontbeanidiot]

.

[D-hops]

So long as the application hasn't changed from last year to this, I think the application makes it pretty clear that if you certify false information they can dismiss you from the law school:

By signing this application, electronically transmitting it, or printing, signing, and mailing the Certification Letter, I certify that

the information contained in this application is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I will notify the Office of
Admissions and Financial Aid promptly if any of this information changes. I understand that furnishing inaccurate or
misleading information can result in denial of admission or dismissal from the Law School and will be reported to the Law
School Admission Council's Committee on Misconduct and Irregularities.

[Randomnumbers]

Bad idea: Lying on your application and getting kicked out of school.

Worse idea: Making a thread about your very unique situation on a forum that admissions people are very familiar with, talking all about your mental health issues and how they contributed to your getting kicked out of school, and then talking about how you won't mention those at all when you apply again.

You've already talked to deans, admissions consultants, and people who actually might know something about this. Dragging all of your laundry out on this forum to get the opinions of people who actually have no idea what might happen with your very unique situation seems to be a horrible idea.

Unrelated news: When you talk about the arson incident, for gods sake stop saying things like "Accidentally set a fire while melting action figures". Say "Accidentally set a fire". The other one makes you sound like a juvenile psychopath, which is really the absolutely wrong impression you want in your circumstances.

[dontbeanidiot]

.

[dontbeanidiot]

.

[ineptimusprime]

Wow, I wish I could have seen the original post before it was redacted.

You were kicked out of law school for failing to disclose that you accidentally lit a portapotty on fire (while burning action figures) at the age of 14? Am I missing something?

[Gail]

Wow, I wish I could have seen the original post before it was redacted.

You were kicked out of law school for failing to disclose that you accidentally lit a portapotty on fire (while burning action figures) at the age of 14? Am I missing something?

Yes. Mental health issues as well. Honestly, my suspicion is that it was a combination of the cover-up plus the stigma of mental health issues that got him kicked out. The balance tilts heavily for mental health, if you ask me.

[ineptimusprime]

Yes. Mental health issues as well. Honestly, my suspicion is that it was a combination of the cover-up plus the stigma of mental health issues that got him kicked out. The balance tilts heavily for mental health, if you ask me.

That seems like a pretty silly thing to not disclose. I seriously doubt it would have affected his cycle.

It's a shame that something so silly has possibly just ruined someone's life. Probably should have disclosed, though.

[dresden doll]

Yes. Mental health issues as well. Honestly, my suspicion is that it was a combination of the cover-up plus the stigma of mental health issues that got him kicked out. The balance tilts heavily for mental health, if you ask me.

That seems like a pretty silly thing to not disclose. I seriously doubt it would have affected his cycle.

It's a shame that something so silly has possibly just ruined someone's life. Probably should have disclosed, though.

Serious mental health problems aren't silly. I express no view on the gravity of OP's condition because I'm not a qualified professional but suffering from, say, schizophrenia would likely create significant C and F issues. I read once about a Berkeley kid who didn't pass C and F because it turned out he was heavily mentally ill - to the point where he once burst into his law school and threatened to blow everything up.

While it might seem harsh to 'fault' people for C and F purposes for having a mental disease, the fact of the matter is that some severe forms of mental illness will in fact preclude a person from properly practicing law. That they didn't choose their problems is ultimately irrelevant; what matters is their capacity to discharge their duties to their clients in a professional and responsible manner, something that a mental illness, if sufficiently severe, may well impede.

[D-hops]

That said, see Golden Rule Insurance v Schwartz for what adding a best of knowledge clause to a certification statement in an application in Illinois does: it reduces the standard of accuracy from what is true to what the applicant reasonably believed was true. Maybe my negligence provides no cover for me, but the total absence of a hearing, skipping that step, is a dangerous way to make important decisions about people's lives. Introducing scienter was a procedural safeguard, but they skipped it.

Are you making an argument that you didn't, to the best of your knowledge, know that this program that you were placed in would be considered "be[ing] the subject of any juvenile delinquency or youthful offender proceeding?"

Second, literal application of that could lead to absurd results. If I changed the name of a person in my PS, presumably to protect their identity, and the school found out, the applicant could be dismissed by your logic. Are you saying materiality does't matter? It always matters in a contract where parties have established interests, even if they properly reserve the right to rescind in the event of nondisclosure. Perhaps their admissions office should have said something more ambiguous, but when I told them of my offense, they said that it was no longer relevant and would have no impact on a hypothetical application. They didn't even bother to qualify the statement by saying it depends on anything else . But this step was skipped too.

I think this is more along the lines of a default for a violation of a rep and warranty rather than a clause for rescission. There is no provision for a hearing. You want due process, you are going to have to go to court. It is what you agreed to when you submitted the application.

Lastly, even if the school CAN rescind, doing something just because you can is always a pretty bad reason to do it. Especially when they basically admitted this was not uniformly the way they treat these situations, that post-acceptance amendments are usually made, but that "on top of everything else" this decision was made. Voiding a contract can't take into account events that had not yet come to pass, but that statement admitted that the university was doing just that.

There is disparate treatment in the way violations of contracts happen all the time. Just because one party chooses not to exercise all of their remedies in one default situation but does in others doesn't make anything they are doing wrong. It may be unfair to the party that gets screwed, but it isn't uncommon.

[ineptimusprime]

Serious mental health problems aren't silly. I express no view on the gravity of OP's condition because I'm not a qualified professional but suffering from, say, schizophrenia would likely create significant C and F issues. I read once about a Berkeley kid who didn't pass C and F because it turned out he was heavily mentally ill - to the point where he once burst into his law school and threatened to blow everything up.

While it might seem harsh to 'fault' people for C and F purposes for having a mental disease, the fact of the matter is that some severe forms of mental illness will in fact preclude a person from properly practicing law. That they didn't choose their problems is ultimately irrelevant; what matters is their capacity to discharge their duties to their clients in a professional and responsible manner, something that a mental illness, if sufficiently severe, may well impede.

Did the application ask for the disclosure of mental illnesses? I don't see how failure to disclose a mental illness could be grounds for dismissal if it was never asked for in the first place. If it was, then this guy should be SOL.

It just seems silly/messed up that this guy is out thousands of dollars and expelled from school.

OP, you should apply to Tulane. They seem to be quite forgiving of serious C & F issues. Hell, maybe that convicted killer there will straight up murder you.

(side note: after reading this, is anyone else worried that their law school will find out about that stolen pencil incident back in first grade and suffer expulsion for "failing to disclose" ?)

[dresden doll]

Serious mental health problems aren't silly. I express no view on the gravity of OP's condition because I'm not a qualified professional but suffering from, say, schizophrenia would likely create significant C and F issues. I read once about a Berkeley kid who didn't pass C and F because it turned out he was heavily mentally ill - to the point where he once burst into his law school and threatened to blow everything up.

While it might seem harsh to 'fault' people for C and F purposes for having a mental disease, the fact of the matter is that some severe forms of mental illness will in fact preclude a person from properly practicing law. That they didn't choose their problems is ultimately irrelevant; what matters is their capacity to discharge their duties to their clients in a professional and responsible manner, something that a mental illness, if sufficiently severe, may well impede.

Did the application ask for the disclosure of mental illnesses? I don't see how failure to disclose a mental illness could be grounds for dismissal if it was never asked for in the first place. If it was, then this guy should be SOL.

It just seems silly/messed up that this guy is out thousands of dollars and expelled from school.

OP, you should apply to Tulane. They seem to be quite forgiving of serious C & F issues. Hell, maybe that convicted killer there will straight up murder you.

The application didn't ask about his mental health problems, and I'm of the opinion that he did not err by not disclosing them unbidden. I was merely addressing people who are in the stuff-beyond-your-control-shouldn't-be-held-against-you-come-C and F-time camp because I simply don't think that's how things do or should work.

[ineptimusprime]

Serious mental health problems aren't silly. I express no view on the gravity of OP's condition because I'm not a qualified professional but suffering from, say, schizophrenia would likely create significant C and F issues. I read once about a Berkeley kid who didn't pass C and F because it turned out he was heavily mentally ill - to the point where he once burst into his law school and threatened to blow everything up.

While it might seem harsh to 'fault' people for C and F purposes for having a mental disease, the fact of the matter is that some severe forms of mental illness will in fact preclude a person from properly practicing law. That they didn't choose their problems is ultimately irrelevant; what matters is their capacity to discharge their duties to their clients in a professional and responsible manner, something that a mental illness, if sufficiently severe, may well impede.

Did the application ask for the disclosure of mental illnesses? I don't see how failure to disclose a mental illness could be grounds for dismissal if it was never asked for in the first place. If it was, then this guy should be SOL.

It just seems silly/messed up that this guy is out thousands of dollars and expelled from school.

OP, you should apply to Tulane. They seem to be quite forgiving of serious C & F issues. Hell, maybe that convicted killer there will straight up murder you.

The application didn't ask about his mental health problems, and I'm of the opinion that he did not err by not disclosing them unbidden. I was merely addressing people who are in the stuff-beyond-your-control-shouldn't-be-held-against-you-come-C and F-time camp because I simply don't think that's how things do or should work.

I agree, but...

So was this guy nominally dismissed for failure to disclose, but more than likely actually dismissed for having a mental illness? Is that the consensus?

[Gail]

So was this guy nominally dismissed for failure to disclose, but more than likely actually dismissed for having a mental illness? Is that the consensus?

I don't know if that's the consensus. But that's what I believe. Too few people are genuinely compassionate. Almost everyone is painfully ignorant about mental health. They'll label you a pariah if you admit to having a mental or emotional disorder. Being called schizophrenic is a pejorative. You're a crazy person, more likely to kill indiscriminately than you are to open a door for someone else. The folks that say "seek help" are the same people who will use it against you to crush your dreams later if you do. Lot of help that is, right? /rant

[dontbeanidiot]

.