Monday, August 3, 2009

Lawyer Sues Law School for Lack of BMW

According to the Associated Press, a New York woman is suing her college because she could not find a job after graduation. Trina Thompson filed her lawsuit in Bronx Supreme Court seeking the $70,000 she spent on her tuition including $2000 for the stress of a 3 month job search. The 27 year old is seeking the money from New York's Monroe College which granted her a bachelor's degree in Information Technology in April. According to a poll on AOL News, 30% of the 29,000 plus people that voted, actually agree with the lawsuit.
Now before you dismiss the lawsuit outright consider what happened across the pond. According to Times Higher Education, a group of students at Rycote College in Oxforshire, England won 14,000 pounds each for their claim that a class in historic vehicle restoration did not give them the requisite skills to equip them for professional careers. 14,ooo pounds! (Actually, I have no idea what a pound is worth). The students claimed that the college broke promises made in its prospectus including failing to deliver work experience. I wonder if it's too late to sue my 10th grade Spanish teacher. When I watch Dora the Explorer, I draw a complete blank.
.
I think the pro se Trina Thompson might be on to something. After all, she did search for a job for a few months during a historic economic crisis. And with an apparent 2.7 grade point average, you would think firms would be knocking down her door. But, I don't think she should be suing Monroe College. She needs to go back further. Did her highschool prepare her for the SATs? Maybe she could have gotten into a better college. Did her junior highschool prepare her for the rigors of highschool? Did her kindergarten prepare her to read? Assuming she finished high school at 18, why did it take her so many years to finish her BA? Did her mom not push her enough.
Trina Thompson is an inspiration. I myself entered law school with the humble expectation that I would be a Wall Street lawyer with the requisite designer red suspenders, a new BMW, a summer house in the Hamptons and one of those metal ball thingamawhatzits that click back and forth. I have stated this in previous posts. To date, I do not have a BMW. I do not work on Wall Street.
.
My summer dream house in the Hamptons is currently a plastic pool in the backyard that I share with a 3 year old. It has killed my grass. And rather than having designer red suspenders, my pants are held up by a crummy belt from Sears. (The softer side of Sears of course.) As such, I plan to sue my alma mater law school for the cost of a BMW. I may even add dear old mom as a co-defendant. She could've pushed me more as a kid. I could have been a brain surgeon. Instead of buying me that Operation game I wanted for Christmas, she bought me Hungry Hungry Hippos. As a result, I followed the path of a lawyer. See you in court, mom.

4 comments:

Irene C. Olszewski, Esq. said...

It appears that I should consider a lawsuit against my Kindergarten teacher. She banned me from the art loft after we argued that the yellow blog I painted was NOT a "sun" but a "space ship". I never painted again and lost out on my only opportunity for a lucrative career as an artist. Years, later, I became an attorney. Go figure.

Anonymous said...

Same thing happened to me. I went to college. I wanted to be a CEO.
I got stuck in a cubicle.

So I had a 2.5 GPA, why can't I be president of the company two months out of college

Cliff Tuttle said...

There is a problem with the cause of action. William Shakespeare, Benjamin Franklin and Andrew Carnegie all succeeded at the absolute highest level with only a third grade education. None of them were forced to become lawyers to salvage their professional lives.

Besides, the statute of limitations has run on my education. Actually, the statute of repose has run, too. If you understood what I just said, you must have failed at life and become a lawyer. Too bad.

Cliff Tuttle
Pittsburgh Legal Back Talk

Ms. Cris Ericson said...

I have three issues, one which I will raise later, about the STUDY MATERIAL FOR THE BAR.

YOU KNOW! The BAR STUDY cards with questions issued by a major publishing company. I will cite a number of these later. All parents and students will happily file a multi-district litigation class action lawsuit when they find out what their younguns are actually being taught in LAW SCHOOL.

$$$$$$$BINGO: MULTI DISTRICT CLASS ACTION.

NOW, ISSUE #1

HOW MANY TIMES in court does a Judge say, "IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NO EXCUSE FOR NOT KNOWING THE LAW"?
Now, there are many, many, many sets of books of laws such as United States Codes and Federal Rules of Regulation and Public Law, etc., etc. WHO IN HOLY HELL HAS EVER READ EVERY SINGLE BOOK?
THEREFORE:
IF
"ignorance is no excuse for not knowing the law" in court, in real time, in real litigation, particularly in criminal cases, "IGNORANCE IS NO EXCUSE FOR NOT KNOWING THE LAW"
THEN
WHY ISN'T EVERYONE ALLOWED TO TAKE THE BAR EXAM ANY TIME THEY WANT TO?

THERE SHOULD BE NO REQUIREMENT WHAT-SO-EVER FOR TAKING THE BAR OTHER THAN BEING A HUMAN BEING SUBJECT TO THE LAWS OF OUR LAND.

POINT #2. I'll be back, the dog is barking.