You are on page 1of 3

STATEMENT RE: JUNE 30, 2014 ABA COMPLAINT

by Dan Skinner

I filed a complaint against Wake Forest with the ABA on June 30, 2014.
I alleged that:
During the 2011-2012 school year, the law school
made a decision about financial aid that was not consistent
with the terms and conditions of the aid as understood by
the approximately 13-14 students affected. They
1
challenged the decision, and __________ advocated on
their behalf. He was asked by the law school to submit a
written response to its decision, and he did so. The law
school’s resolution of the conflict was favorable to the
students.

According to Wake Forest’s Response to Complaint
under Rule 24, ABA Rules of Procedure for Approval of
Law Schools, the law school established a folder for
student complaints that it has “faithfully maintained” since
August 2011. The grievance __________ filed on behalf
of the students, however, is not in the folder. The response
states, “The instant complaint by Mr. Skinner is the only
complaint in that folder.”

As a result, the law school is out of compliance with
Standard 512(b). The written response to the original
decision needs to be in the record because it constitutes a
complaint under 512(c) — the students’ grievance sought to
1
The 2011-2012 Standards required law schools to publish financial aid
1
information in a fair and accurate manner that was reflective of actual
practice (Standard 509(a) and Interpretation 509-1(2)). American Bar
Association Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar,
2011-2012 Standards and Rules of Procedure for Approval of Law Schools,
40-41 (2011).
bring to the law school’s attention a significant problem
that directly implicated the school’s program of legal
education and its compliance with Standard 509.

. . . .

I requested a copy of the complaint from
__________, and I disclosed that the document he wrote
would impeach evidence submitted to the Forsyth Superior
Court by Wake Forest’s attorneys.

. . . .

__________ stated, “I didn't make a complaint,
formal or otherwise. I just talked to the administration
about the mistake and they fixed it.” The adverb “just”
could mean that the “mistake” was corrected shortly after
he talked to the administration, or that he attributes the
correction to verbal advocacy rather than his written
communication.

It is unlikely that __________’s use of “just” was a
denial of the allegation that he submitted a written
complaint. He had notice that a written complaint would
2
prove that Dean Morant misrepresented the law school’s
compliance with accreditation standards and that Wake
Forest’s attorneys provided false information to Forsyth
Superior Court. Because the implications of having made a
written complaint are so serious, it is unlikely that
__________ would have made such an ambiguous
statement if no [written communication] was [made].

. . . .

The Section on Legal Education already has evidence of
improper financial aid reductions: Dean Reynolds’ May 10,
2
Id. (second adverb definition).
2
2012 letter. Dean Reynolds’ explanation of the reduction of
my scholarships is facially implausible. Paying a seat
deposit did not constitute a legally enforceable promise that
I would attend Wake Forest’s law school. Law schools
make an offers of financial aid and various scholarships in
exchange for students’ attendance in their programs.
Unilateral contracts are formed in which the promise of
scholarships is accepted by actual attendance —
performance, not a return promise.

Complaint Against an ABA-Approved Law School at 1-4 (submitted June 30,
2014 by Dan Skinner) (footnotes 2-16 omitted).
On July 14, 2014, Stephanie Giggetts, Assistant Consultant,
acknowledged my complaint and wrote:
[Rule 24 of the ABA Rules of Procedure for Approval of
Law Schools] provides that if a law school that is the
subject of a complaint is due to receive a regularly
scheduled sabbatical site visit within a reasonable amount
of time after the complaint is received, usually within one
year, the complaint may be handled as part of the
sabbatical site visit. Since Wake Forest is due to receive a
sabbatical site visit within one year of this complaint, the
complaint will be given to the site team and handled as part
of the sabbatical site visit. You will not receive any further
report on this matter.

Wake Forest’s site visit is scheduled for August 2014.






Date: July 19, 2014
3