Does anyone have an opinion about Latham? I know you're often reticent to voice it on this board, but could you?

Maybe Latham Chicago partners should teach Latham New York partners how to bring in business. Otherwise, the Latham New York office will collapse the entire firm.

I suppose that I should know the answer to this question, but is the University of Illinois School of Law accredited by the American Bar Association? Does anyone know whether the school is a member of the Association of American Law Schools?

4, U of I lost their accreditation and good standing with the AALS because of the admissions scandal. However, its graduates can still take the Illinois bar examination and may eventually get admitted to other jurisdictions by reciprocity. Note that this doesn't affect alumni who graduated prior to it losing accreditation.

How many laid off associates' salaries could this one small legal bill have paid?

4, 5, the shtick was never funny. Thanks for trying, though.

An abhorrent law firm for an abhorrent law school. How fitting.

Does anyone have an opinion on 2 being annoying?

merkin

Please clarify: Did Latham layoff associates recently? Were any of them U of I grads?

What is this school rated? It will be a bonafide TTT for sure next year.

12, USNWR doesn't rate non-accredited schools, so it U of I will have no ranking next year. This may change if it regains accreditation.

13

you suck

12

Latham: a good choice for callbacks? My Vault: Best Firms in NYC 2008 guide says it's a fun place with a "work hard, play hard" culture.

BTW, the article states that the invoices are for the representation of the entire University, not just the law school...

$500,000 in legal fees? no problem. All U of I needs to do now is come up with a donor who can give a half mill to the school. Maybe they could offer the donor's kid a spot in the class or something.

$400k? That'll pay for about 5 severence packages for ex-Latham first years. Score!

17 FTW!!!

HOW IS EVERYONE DOING TODAY????

Latham: U of I, we hired a couple of your dumb political appointee kids, and now the economy sucks, so we're going to have to cut back on hiring these kids.

U of I: How about we through a half million in legal fees your way?

Latham: That should work. Thanks.

Folks,
My great-uncle has an ethical dilemma. I'm hoping that some of the health law attorneys can weigh in.

He is 97 years old and lives in an assisted-living facility. He has all his marbles but due to illness is unlikely to live beyond six months.

The other morning a female resident suffering from dementia wandered into his room as he stepped out of the shower. She began howling with laughter at the sight of his tiny penis (an unfortunate family trait. She then ran through the halls announcing this embarrassing news.

Now he is ashamed to be seen. He won't go the cafeteria and has stopped taking walks. His self-esteem is in the gutter.

He consulted a plastic surgeon who promises that he can make him look like a very wrinkled Ron Jeremy. The procedure will cost $27,000 and Medicare will cover it.

My uncle desperately wants to look "large and in charge" just once before he dies. He is dreaming of wandering the halls naked. But his concern is whether the tax payer expense is fair to young people.

Please advise.

#2's moniker/photo combo made me bust a gut. thanks.

Do U of Illinois Grads need to take the bar if applying for paralegal?

Latham's long-time Chairman and Managing Partner is an Illinois alum. Anyone shocked that his firm gets the business?

20, eh.

money would have been better spent saving the Chief and telling the liberals whiners to fuck off

-Not a U of I grad

1) If kids aren't trying to get in through a back door at your law school, you're going to or went to a shitty law school.

2) Illinois Law's reputation is fine. Every legal blog written by an academic I've read seems to believe this is a non-issue. Most current lawyers or judges probably: a) don't give a shit; b) have already forgotten this happened; c) got clouted in to their own law school; or d) are trying to clout their own kid into the law school they went to.

3) Clout kids have two purposes. One, the bring money and connections. Two, they finish at the bottom of the class.

4) What does that Latham bill come out to be? What's the average Latham rate in this market?

Wow, two posts on Illinois in one day. The first about how our mascot was a fictitious Indian. The second on how our school has big legal bills.

28, reputation doesn't count for much when the ABA strips your accreditation due to shady admission practices.

30, not sure if you're trying to be funny. No one has ever seriously argued for stripping Illinois of its ABA accreditation over this issue. The school is a charter member of the AALS for christ sake.

I suppose that I should know the answer to this question, but is Latham & Watkins accredited by the American Bar Association? Does anyone know whether it is a member of the Association of American Law Schools?

@8

Wow, "abhorrent", that's a big word for someone who went to Cooley.

@8

Wow, "abhorrent", that's a big word for someone who went to Cooley.

31, the pieces are in place now to remove its accreditation. ABA and AALS canons require fair admissions process, which U of I has failed to live up to. Why should U of I get special treatment?

Hey 31 and 35 pay attention in your Tier 4 classes.

35,

Have you ever even looked at an application for the top law schools (1-25)? They ask for legacy information (e.g. name relatives and close acquaintances who attended this school). No pieces are in place for anything, enjoy your first year at cooley or pace.

Not 31 or a U of I grad.

37, they collect that for statistical and informational purposes only. If you have any evidence to the contrary, please forward to the ABA and AALS.

Maybe this is why Illinois increased their incoming class from 180 students the previous year to 230 this year.

I hope the school stops ignoring this problem and addresses the obvious crowding issue.

35 -
you have no clue what you are talking about. 31 is right on this topic. there has never been any question of accreditation -
furthermore it's preposterous to think that this doesn't happen at EVERY OTHER LAW SCHOOL. The only difference with U of I is that it is a state run institution thus reporters were actually able to get their hands on documents to prove this practice.

40. You must be right. Schools can maintain their accreditation no matter how unfair and arbitrary their admissions standards are, and U of I has the poor fortune of being the only state run law school in the country. Thanks for your insight.

-- 35.

where does Future Ellie stand on this?

I'm confused. Has U of I lost its accreditation, or is it merely at risk of losing its accreditation? Please advise.

42 - I'm glad you ask. As you know, I've been a lifelong opponent of forcing students who take on student loans to actually pay those loans back. Debt is just a fancy word for, well, debt. But when it comes to paying the bills of law firms one retains? Those must be paid at all costs. Because that's consistecy. And that's what I do.

I also sleep until noon. I do that too.

Losing ABA accreditation is like the nuclear option. It says, "your students aren't qualified to be lawyers." No one in their right mind would say that of the vast majority of Illinois grads. I dare anyone to find a prominent legal academic who believes that Illinois Law should lose its accreditation over this admissions issue.

Moreover, if you have followed the investigation, you would know that no one truly unqualified was admitted into Illinois Law. Everyone was expected to pass the bar. The Category I students were just expected to finish at or near the bottom of the class. The candidates were admitted after the class was largely finalized. These candidates then needed to be balanced off with other candidates who had higher LSAT scores/GPAs. Therefore, no candidate was ever excluded from Illinois Law because of the list. It's exceptionaly hard to make any accreditation case given those facts.

Lastly, if you think this doesn't happen at other schools, you're blind to a lot of facts. Illinois got busted because there was a list and the list was FOIAable. The list originated as a seperate tracking document but evolved into preferential admit list. I imagine when a big time donor calls a prestigious private law school, the Dean just calls the admissions person and says, "if he's an ok candidate, just let him in". The formality and the public nature of Illinois is what got Illinois in trouble. Admissions "scandals" happen to some degree everywhere.

-31

45, you're wrong. Please reference the ABA standards of accreditation which require sound admission policies: http://www.abanet.org/legaled/standards/2009-2010%20StandardsWebContent/Chapter5.pdf @ 501(a).

Therefore, a law school can lose accreditation for failing to have sound admission policies. Are you seriously going to argue that political favoritism and cronyism are sound admission policies?

As for your assertion that this goes on at other law schools, please provide citations or apologize for smearing other schools with the taint of Chicago-style ethics.

Thanks,

35.

isn't abanet a notorious troll site?

“The bulk of the money went to Latham & Watkins, which advised the university on cooperating with the state commission reviewing the school's admissions procedures. In a statement released Friday, University of Illinois general counsel Thomas Bearrows said that Latham has been paid $392,120.”

Let me get this straight:
Latham advised the university to cooperate with the commission, and for that advice they were paid $392,120?
Heck, I would have given them that same advice if they agreed to validate my parking. If I was on the University board of Trustees, I would be pissed about that bill.

Hey, at least U. of Illinois is trying to get their graduates jobs - even if it is illegal. I'm a Cardozo student and our OCS is a joke. Only 13 firms actually wanted to talk to 3Ls this year and the Dean of OCS doesn't have any other programs in line for students nearing graduation.

Maybe someone from OCS will read this and realize it has to pay attention to its graduating students who will soon be on the streets.

35/46: I'm unsure whether you're an Illinois applicant that was denied admission, or a plaintiff's attorney trying to drum up business from denied applicants.

If it's the latter I'll excuse your unfounded polemics as sound marketing. We've all got to make a buck in this market.

If it's the former, then I shouldn't be surprised you're foolish enough to think such a crackpot idea holds water. I'll wait while you hold your breath at Phoenix.

-Illinois 2L

50, which part is it that you refute? Do you refute that part of the accreditation standards are sound admission policies, or do you refute that admitting people based on cronyism and political connections are unsound admission policies? Either way, you are wrong and U of I's accreditation should be in jeopardy. I am sorry that you got wrapped up in this-- it's not really your fault you ended up in a school that violated basic ABA standards-- but the impact an accreditation decision will have on innocent third parties can't be used as an excuse to lower standards.

35,

First, one violation of ABA standards does not mean a law school looses its accreditation. The ABA doesn't use the option lightly. It's clearly over kill except in your own mind.

Second, sound addmissions policies IS in fact a set of vague terms. Maybe sound means only qualified people get in. Everyone who got in was qualified to pass the bar and to be a lawyer. Sound doesn't mean fair (I haven't read all the rules, maybe it does say fair, I frankly don't give a damn).

Third, you want me to cite other instances when those instances aren't public? Sure, impossible. However, you can't doubt the concept that just because Illinois got caught that it was the only school to engage in these shenanigans. I think intuitively you'd say that the kid who got into Harvard with an LSAT of a 165 had a little help getting in. I bet a few Harvard alumni or students would have anecdotes to share about clouted kids. Or does everyone think people get into Harvard on their own merits?

52:

1) So, your theory is that accreditation standards are meaningless unless a whole bunch of them are violated. Very interesting.

2) If you're right, then there's no such thing as 'sound' admission policies, because everybody with a pulse is in theory qualified to pass the bar.

3) I suppose 'hearsay' and 'speculation' are kinds of evidence. Your theory is basically, "I allege these things to occur, and therefore they occurred. If there's no evidence, it's just because the evidence is being suppressed." You're going to be a hell of a lawyer.