Law Schools

Charleston Law Finds A New Suitor

Now Charleston has a new suitor willing to save it from for-profit InfiLaw. But would it run the school any better?

By  
on

If you haven’t been following the saga of the Charleston School of Law, here’s the short version:

There once was a subpar legal institution
It could barely teach the constitution
The students had no hope
But the law school couldn’t cope
So it sold itself to InfiLaw.

Yeah I suck at writing limericks. And “couldn’t cope” is a bit inaccurate — it’s only a financial wreck because the founders skimmed $25 million in profits off the school over the last three years. The point is, after years of struggling to be acknowledged as a real law school — ABA accreditation doesn’t count because I’m pretty sure they’d accredit the JoePa Academy of Law if I asked nicely — Charleston couldn’t hack it on its own and entered an agreement to sell the school to InfiLaw: lock, stock, and clinic. At the time, Elie described Charleston students as strippers waking up to find out the club was sold to a whorehouse, which resonates.

Legislators decried the move. The Licensing Committee rejected the sale. And yet the deal soldiers ahead.

Now Charleston has a new suitor willing to save it from for-profit InfiLaw. But would it run the school any better?

Nah.

Sponsored

One of the school’s founders, Ed Westbrook, has set up a non-profit entity to audition for Charleston’s love:

Westbrook on Thursday announced the newly formed Law School Transition Eleemosynary Corp., with an 11-member board of high-powered legal experts, which he hopes eventually will run the now for-profit law school. But that only can happen if InfiLaw fails to get approval to run the school from the state Commission on Higher Education or the American Bar Association, or if law school founders and InfiLaw agree to sever an arrangement for the company to acquire the school.

“Eleemosynary” means “of, relating to, or supported by charity.” I can honestly say I’d never seen that word before. Which is hard to believe because it’s a perfectly cromulent word.

Even with a fancy title, Westbrook’s bid has not swayed his co-founders from their commitment to cash in, and InfiLaw remains equally stoked about the deal:

InfiLaw spokeswoman Kathy Heldman said the company isn’t backing away from its plan to purchase the school. “Nothing has occurred to change our belief that InfiLaw is the best option to build a strong and bright future for the Charleston School of Law. Only InfiLaw possesses the financing and experience to help Charleston meet the demands and challenges of a changing legal education environment. Our agreement to buy the school remains in place and our plans are to execute on that agreement,” she said.

Sponsored

But, hey, Westbrook’s entity could still end up running the school. InfiLaw still hasn’t received final approval from the South Carolina Commission on Higher Education. In fact, it withdrew its earlier application prior to a vote. Some last-second concerns about losing the vote, perhaps? If so, and InfiLaw hasn’t won the hearts and minds of the Commission, Westbrook could be taking over the school by default.

Look, no one disses InfiLaw more than Above the Law, but let’s not buy into the savior narrative around this story. Westbrook, who has publicly dissented from the sale for some time, is positioned in the media as the warm and fuzzy, education-minded non-profit compared to InfiLaw, but let’s not forget the school wasn’t exactly lighting the world on fire under its previous management.

Charleston School of Law founder Westbrook launches nonprofit group as alternative to InfiLaw [The Post and Courier (Charleston)]

Earlier: I Bet You Thought Going To Charleston Law Was Already Rock Bottom
InfiLaw Purchase Of Charleston Law Rejected By Licensing Committee

Topics

, , ,