LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

ANITA L STAVER v AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: ALSVABA203354, CourtCode: DIS, CourtName: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE, Plaintiff: ANITA L STAVER, State: FL Florida, UniqueCaseRef: LCD>ALSVABA203354, Aba, Support, Barry, Accreditation, Bar, Council, Law School, United States, Act, Memorandum, Florida, Standards, Law Schools, Accreditation Committee, Students, American Bar Association, Hereafter, Injunctive Relief, Representative Plaintiffs, Preliminary Injunction, Legal Education, Admissions, Sherman Act, Accrediting, Accreditation Committee Recommends, Consent Decree, Permanent Injunctive Relief, Violations, Provisions, Motion, Compliance, Lsat Scores, Doe, American Bar, Action Letter , ContentID: 120249952

Case Documents
1   MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 123651
46 pages
PDF
2   COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 123649
61 pages
PDF
3 2001-08-24 PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO DEF MOT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 123652
9 pages
PDF
4 1995-06 DEPRIEST DECLARATION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 123650
5 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 4 documents , 121 pages
Price: $ 34.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
COURT
SUPPORT
MEMORANDUM
UNITED STATES
ABA
PLAINTIFFS
LAW SCHOOLS
ACCREDITATION
COUNCIL
BARRY
STANDARDS
ACT
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
FLORIDA
BAR
ACCREDITATION COMMITTEE
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
PROVISIONS
LEGAL EDUCATION
CONSENT DECREE
AMERICAN BAR
ADMISSIONS
ACCREDITING
RECOMMENDATION
SHERMAN ACT
DOE
ULTRA VIRES
DOJ
COMPETITION
                        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
                                MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
                                       ORLANDO DIVISION

ANITA L. STAVER, SCOTT BLAUE;                   )
CESERY L. BULLARD, TERRY                        )
COVERT, DARYLAINE  HERNANDEZ,  )
TIMMY MCCLAIN,  STEPHANIE                       )
PAPOULIS, SHANNON KEITH                         )
TURNER, individually, and on behalf of          )
all others similarly situated; and              )
MICHAEL M. O'BRIEN, individually,               )
and on behalf of all others similarly situated ))
        Plaintiffs,                             ))
                vs.                             )      Case No.: 6:01-CV-873-ORL-31-KRS
                                                )
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION,                       ))
        Defendant.                              )
____________________________________)



       MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR
    DECLARATORY, PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF




Larry Crain                                     Mathew D. Staver
 TN Bar No. 9040                                  Florida Bar No. 0701092
BRENTWOOD LAW OFFICE                            Erik W. Stanley
5214 Maryland Way                                 Florida Bar No. 0183504
Suite 402                                       LIBERTY COUNSEL
Brentwood, TN 37027                             210 East Palmetto Avenue
(615) 376-2600 - Telephone                      Longwood, FL 32750
(615) 345-6009 - Telefacsimile                  (407) 875-2100 - Telephone
                                                (407) 875-0770 - Telefacsimile
                                                Attorneys for Individual and Representative



                                                   TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ABBREVIATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

STATEMENT OF THE CASE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
  • MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR DECLARATORY, PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT
  • THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL LIKELIHOOD PLAINTIFFS WILL PREVAIL ON THE MERITS BECAUSE DEFENDANT HAS
  • The ABA's Delegation Of Authority To An Advisory Board To Render Law School Accreditation
  • The DOJ Antitrust Consent Decree
  • The DOE's Review Of The ABA And The Modified DOJ Consent
  • The Ultra Vires Act Of The ABA
  • The Council's decision overruling the Accreditation Committee
  • The ABA's Action with Respect to Barry is Private Action
  • Memorandum of Law in Support of Preliminary Injunction - Page ii
  • Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of Carpenters,
  • Goldfarb v. Virginia State Bar,
  • National Society of Professional Engineers v. United States,
  • United States v. American Bar Ass'n,

  • 2 . COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    BAR
    BARRY
    ABA
    COUNCIL
    PLAINTIFF
    ACCREDITATION
    ACT
    STUDENTS
    AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
    COURT
    HEREAFTER
    FLORIDA
    STANDARDS
    SUPPORT
    REPRESENTATIVE PLAINTIFFS
    ACCREDITATION COMMITTEE
    ACCREDITATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS
    SHERMAN ACT
    PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
    INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
    VIOLATIONS
    ADMISSIONS
    UNITED STATES
    LEGAL EDUCATION
    LSAT SCORES
    ACTION LETTER
    COMPLIANCE
    FLORIDA BAR EXAM
    ACCREDITING
    
                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
                                    MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
                                           ORLANDO DIVISION
    
    ANITA L. STAVER, SCOTT BLAUE,                   )
    CESERY L. BULLARD, TERRY                        )
    COVERT, DARYLAINE  HERNANDEZ,  )
    TIMMY MCCLAIN,  STEPHANIE                       )
    PAPOULIS, SHANNON KEITH                         )
    TURNER, individually, and on behalf of          )
    all others similarly situated; and              )
    MICHAEL M. O'BRIEN, individually,               )
    and on behalf of all others similarly situated,))
            Plaintiffs,                             ))
                    vs.                             )     Case No.:
                                                    )
    AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION,                       )     DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
                                                    )     CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
            Defendant.                              )
    ____________________________________)
    
                                               COMPLAINT
    
            COME NOW, the individual and representative plaintiffs, ANITA L. STAVER, SCOTT
    
    BLAUE, CESERY L. BULLARD, TERRY COVERT, DARYLAINE HERNANDEZ, TIMMY
    
    MCCLAIN, STEPHANIE PAPOULIS and SHANNON KEITH TURNER, (hereinafter
    
    "Representative Plaintiffs") and MICHAEL M. O'BRIEN, (hereinafter "Representative Plaintiff
    
    O'Brien") (collectively referred to hereinafter as "Plaintiffs"), by and through their undersigned
    
    counsel, and respectfully request this Court to issue Declaratory Judgment, Preliminary and
    
    Permanent Injunctive Relief and Damages.  In support thereof, Plaintiffs show unto the Court as
    
    follows:
    
            This is a civil action whereby Plaintiffs seek Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief
    
    enjoining Defendant, the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, (hereafter "ABA"), and other
    
    conspirators, agents, servants and employees and those acting in active concert and with actual
    
                                             Complaint - Page 1
    
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
  • "Representative Plaintiffs") and MICHAEL M. O'BRIEN,
  • This is a civil action whereby Plaintiffs seek Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief
  • enjoining Defendant, the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION,, and other
  • the Florida Antitrust Act of 1980, and Section 108.40 of the General Not for Profit
  • (hereafter "Illinois Not for Profit
  • An actual controversy exists between the parties, in that the challenged actions of the ABA
  • violations by the ABA of the Sherman Act and the Florida Antitrust Act,
  • Representative Plaintiffs are students or graduates of Barry University
  • The ABA's major functions are to "provide law school accreditation,
  • the state of Florida and performs other accrediting activities within all the states,
  • involve or affect the ability of, law schools seeking to provide legal education services and
  • from Barry in June 2000, and sat for the Florida Bar Exam in July, 2000.
  • Site Team prepared an exhaustive report which was submitted to the ABA Accreditation
  • Admissions to the Bar, is required to give deference to a favorable
  • Accreditation Committee recommends against provisional accreditation.
  • Violating its own Rule, the Council undertook a de novo review, reversed the
  • the House adopted the Standards for Approval of Law Schools
  • In determining that the ABA was not in compliance with the federal law,
  • In the United States' Memorandum in Support of the Joint Motion for Modification
  • The Action Letter stated that Barry "has made considerable progress toward coming
  • Students enrolling for the first time in the Fall 1999 had LSAT scores ranging from 131 - 154

  • 3 . PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO DEF MOT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    MOTION
    BARRY
    ABA
    STUDENT
    CONTINUANCE
    OPPOSITION
    EXHIBIT
    COURT
    GRADUATES
    COUNSEL
    FLORIDA
    STUDENT LOANS
    PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
    PRITIKIN
    LAW
    PLAINTIFF TURNER
    DAVID
    ABA COUNCIL
    RECONSIDER
    KING
    ATTORNEY
    REQUEST
    LAW FIRM
    ACCREDITATION
    SCHOOL
    COVERT
    COMMITTEE
    SUPREME COURT
    COMPLAINT EXHIBIT
    
                                UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
                                       MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
                                             ORLANDO DIVISION
    
    ANITA L. STAVER, SCOTT BLAUE;                     )
    CESERY L. BULLARD, TERRY                          )
    COVERT, DARYLAINE  HERNANDEZ,  )
    TIMMY MCCLAIN,  STEPHANIE                         )
    PAPOULIS, SHANNON KEITH                           )
    TURNER, individually, and on behalf of            )
    all others similarly situated; and                )
    MICHAEL M. O'BRIEN, individually,                 )
    and on behalf of all others similarly situated, ))
            Plaintiffs,                               ))
                    vs.                               )      Case No.: 6:01-CV-873-ORL-31-KRS
                                                      )
    AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION,                         ))
            Defendant.                                )
    ____________________________________ )
    
     PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF
                                         AUGUST 24, 2001, HEARING
    
            COME NOW the Plaintiffs, by and through their undersigned counsel, and respectfully file
    
    this Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Continuance of August 24, 2001, Hearing, and state as
    
    follows:
    
            1.      On August 3, 2001, the Defendant, American Bar Association (hereafter "ABA"),
    
    filed a motion requesting this Court to continue the Preliminary Injunction Hearing presently set
    
    August 24, 2001, at 9:30 a.m.
    
            2.      The ABA argues that one of their counsel, David Pritikin of Sidley, Austin, Brown
    
    & Wood, is unable to appear at the August 24th hearing because of "prior and long-standing
    
    
                           Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Continuance
                                       of August 24, 2001, Hearing - Page 1
    
    
    
    commitments" where he will not be available from August 20 - 31.  What the motion fails to state
    
    is that the long-standing commitment is a personal vacation, and further fails to state that the
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
  • COME NOW the Plaintiffs, by and through their undersigned counsel, and respectfully file
  • this Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Continuance of August 24, 2001, Hearing, and state
  • The ABA argues that one of their counsel, David Pritikin of Sidley, Austin, Brown
  • The ABA received Service of Process on July 26,
  • The ABA has obtained local counsel of David King.
  • The motion only says that one attorney, namely David Pritikin,
  • On the ABA's recent filings with this Court, the law firm of Sidley, Austin, Brown & Wood have
  • depositions could be presented at the Preliminary Injunction Hearing.
  • depositions of the ABA Council members after the Preliminary Injunction Hearing.
  • begin taking courses at Barry in the fall, and August 24 is the last day on which they can
  • Plaintiff Turner needs only 3 more hours to graduate, but he needs to take 5 hours
  • to be eligible for student financial loans and to continue deferment of his student loans.
  • See Barry Drop/Add Policy, Exhibit
  • burden of paying back his student loans, since he would receive a higher salary as an
  • Plaintiff Terry Covert faces the same dilemma as Plaintiff Turner.
  • about whether to begin school while Barry still remains unaccredited,
  • He is a Barry student who recently received a partial scholarship to attend Florida
  • his concern is regarding provisional accreditation.
  • Supreme Court ordered that the scores on the January and June 2000 graduates be sealed pending
  • See Florida Supreme Court Order, February 23, 2001, Complaint Exhibit 13.
  • reverses ABA Accreditation Committee recommendation and denies Barry
  • Stanley Talcott stating that he anticipates a motion to reconsider will be
  • information to ABA Council regarding Barry's request for reconsideration.

  • 4 . DEPRIEST DECLARATION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    CONSENT DECREE
    DOE
    COUNCIL
    UNITED STATES
    DISTRICT COURT
    DECLARE
    LAW
    EDUCATION
    ESQ
    DOE REGULATIONS
    TUNNEY ACT
    AMENDMENTS
    ACCREDITATION PROCESS
    LAW SCHOOLS
    FOREGOING
    BRENTWOOD
    DARRYL
    DEPRIEST
    BAR
    HEREBY
    REVIEW
    ANTITRUST
    SATISFY
    ADMISSIONS
    BUDGET
    CONSULTATION
    COMPLIANCE
    RECONSIDERATION
    PERIOD CONSISTENT
    
                            UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
                                    MmDLE  DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
                                           ORLANDO DIVISION
    
    Al'fiT A L.  ST A ~R,  SCOTT BLAUE,                    )
    CESERY L. BULLARD,  TERRY                              )
    COVERT,  DARYLAINE  HERNANDEZ,                         )
    TIMMY  MCCLAIN,  STEPHANIE
    P APOULIS,  SHANNON  KEITH  TURNER,                    )
    individually,  and on behalf of  all others            )
    similarly  situated; and WCHAEL  M.                    )       Case No.  6:01-CY-873-0RL-31-KRS
    O'BRIEN,  individually,  and on behalfofall            )
    others similarly  situated,                            )       Judge  Gregory  A.  Presnell
    
                    Plaintiffs,                                    Magistrate  Judge Karla  R. 
    
                            VS.                            ))
    AMERICAN  BAR  ASSOCIATION,                            )
    
    
    
    
    
                  DECLARA  TION  OF DARRYL  L.  DEPRIEST  IN  SUPPORT  OF
               DEFENDANT  AMERICAN  BAR  ASSOCIATION'S  OPPOSITION  TO
               PLAINTIFFS'  MOTION  FOR DECLARATORY,  PRELIMINARY  AND
                                   PERl"1ANENT  INJUNCTIVE  RELIEF
    
                     I, Darryl  L. DePriest, hereby state and declare as follows.
    
    
                              am the  General Counsel 'of the American  Bar  Association ("ABA").      
    
     have held this  position  from  1998 to the present. I have acquired personal knowledge of  the
    
     facts stated below while  serving  in this  position as well  as from  a  review of  records of 
    
     regularly conducted activities of the ABA.
    
    
     1995 Department  of Justice  Consent Decree
    
                            In June 1995, the United States Department of Justice ("DOT')  filed  a
    
     antitrust suit against the AB.i\,  alleging violations  of antitrust laws in the accreditation
    
    
    
    Along  with  the  complaint,  the  DOl  filed  a  proposed  Consent Decree,  which  had  been
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
  • I, Darryl L. DePriest, hereby state and declare as follows.
  • the United States Department of Justice filed a civil
  • antitrust suit against the AB.i\, alleging violations of antitrust laws in the accreditation
  • Along with the complaint, the DOl filed a proposed Consent Decree, which had been
  • procedures set forth in the consent decree and the Tunney Act, 15 V.S.C. § 16-, Judge
  • Department of Education Requirements for Accrediting Agencies and 2001 Amendments To Consent
  • Since 1952 the Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions
  • and deteffi1ine an accreditation budget "with no review by or consultation with any other
  • in consultation with the DOE and in order to satisfy the DOE that
  • accreditation process to give the Council final decision-making authority concerning
  • accreditation of individual law schools.
  • refers it back to the Council for reconsideration based on the reasons specified by the House.
  • DOE that the Council was in full compliance with DOE regulations,
  • 'Education and Admissions to the bar.
  • Follo~1ng a notice and comment period consistent ~1th the procedures
  • I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
  • I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing has been served by Federal
  • Staver, Esq., Erik fJi: Stanley, Esq., Liberty Counsel, 210 E. Palmetto
  • and Larry CrG}'on, Esq., Brentwood Law Office, 5214 Maryland
  •    |