On Thursday, Acting Supreme Court Justice Richard Platkin, a former valedictorian of Albany Law himself, dismissed the lawsuit against the school. Though plaintiffs had earlier requested the judge’s recusal, he had disagreed and had decided he had the ability to remain impartial.
As in most other similar lawsuits brought by law students, this matter against the Albany Law School, too, was brought on the ground of employment data that was “likely to mislead a reasonable consumer.” The lawsuit had alleged violation of Section 349 of the state General Business Law, and Section 350, which related to damages from false advertising.
While dismissing the claims of the law students, Platkin held that law students were not in the shoes of “general consumers” as they are “a reasonably well-educated group of consumers who are called upon to make major life decisions.” According to him, the decision to enroll at a particular school should be based upon much more information than a single set of employment statistics.
Anyway, caveat emptor …
The graduates claimed that while deciding upon future employment prospects, it was reasonable for them to base that part of their decision to join the law school upon the employment data provided by the law school.
They did not allege that they were dissatisfied with any other part of their decision in joining the law school in as much where the decision was concerned with the learning imparted by the law school, or other facilities generally expected from a law school.
However, the lawsuit has been dismissed.
On Friday, Henry Greenberg, representing the Albany Law School said Platkin’s ruling was exceptionally well reasoned.
The case is Matthew Austin v. Albany Law School of Union University, New York State Supreme Court, Albany County, No. A0014/2012.