Struggling Cooley Law Dumped By Western Michigan University

Cooley Law School — an institution that recently gained public renown as the worst law school in America thanks to its association with Michael Cohen — is once again making headlines with some more bad news. Western Michigan University, which entered into an affiliation with the independent law school in 2014, has decided to part ways with Cooley, referring to the arrangement as a “distraction.”

Ouch.

Hot off the decision to close another one of its campuses at the end of the academic year, Cooley is now faced with losing its ties to a public research university that gave the school an air of legitimacy. Western Michigan spent the last year doing some soul searching and decided that the time had come to move on, with its Board of Trustees noting that things just weren’t working out as hoped between the two schools.

From the Board’s recommendation to end the arrangement between the schools:

It was the hope of both institutions that the affiliation would improve the quality of the educational experience for students at both institutions and would serve to enhance the reputation and standing of both institutions in the academic community. Several years after implementation those hopes have not been realized.

Cooley, which has had two accreditation battles in the past three years, was once the largest law school in the country with several campuses spread across two states, but thanks to prospective law students catching on to the fact that their employment prospects as graduates would be just as good as their chances of passing the bar exam (read: not-so great), both its real estate holdings and its student body shrunk. The law school even had its name plastered on a minor league baseball stadium for more than a decade, but even that has come to an end.

Western Michigan is also using the coronavirus crisis as its out with Cooley Law. Here’s more from the Board’s recommendation:

[T]he impact of the pandemic on higher education has led each institution to focus on their core missions. Much has changed at both organizations and in the world of legal education since 2013. The affiliation was intended to be a prelude to more joint programs and a closer collaboration between the institutions. Those intentions have not materialized in seven years, and they are not on the immediate horizon. Ventures not at the center of WMU’s strengths and mission have been eliminated to maintain focus and stability through these unprecedented times. The Board believes that affiliation with Cooley has become a distraction from the University’s core mission.

The vote to terminate the affiliation took place yesterday and was unanimous.

Just like a law student, it’ll take Western Michigan three years to get out of Cooley, but at least the university won’t be saddled with student loan debt. In November 2023, the Western Michigan University Cooley Law School will be no more, and only the Thomas M. Cooley Law School will remain.

Western Michigan University Ditches Cooley Law School [Law.com]


Staci ZaretskyStaci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.

Lawyer Called Clerk ‘Dumb F*ck’ And Threatened To Fight Him… Guess Which State?

There are overly aggressive jerks in the legal profession, of course, but generally they’re content to be obnoxious. You rarely have a lawyer, let alone an attorney with leadership responsibilities, threatening clerks to fist fights outside the courthouse. And yet here we are. Happy Love Your Lawyer Day!

So what state brings this kind of energy?

Florida is always an option, but alas no. Texas wouldn’t have been a bad bet, but Joe Jamail is sadly no longer with us. Pennsylvania is getting closer, but until Gritty gets a law degree they’re safe. No, this is a Jersey thing.

Deposed city law director John Morelli allegedly challenged clerk Matthew Conlon to a fight outside City Hall and called him a “dumb f*ck” in an email last month, according to court records.

The clerk was so afraid of Morelli that he asked council to support his bid to get a restraining order, the documents show.

The clerk made the claims in a sworn certification filed in support of councilwoman Robin Vaughn’s court papers challenging Mayor Reed Gusciora’s request to a judge for a stay of Morelli’s firing.

The “dumb f*ck” comment came as Morelli explained defamation law — which was relevant because the clerk was threatening defamation suits after a city council member questioned whether or not the clerk ever passed the bar exam. Conlon claims he passed in 2012, but outlets have been unable to verify that so far. That’s an interesting wrinkle and would, potentially, actually make him a dumb f*ck.

However, it’s not a reason for an attorney to tell a guy to “‘meet him in the council president’s parking space’ in some apparent reference to a proposed physical altercation.” This is why Conlon is asking for a restraining order

The City Council, meanwhile, has fired Morelli “for cause” after he allegedly leaked Council documents illegally. Those documents appear to have kicked off investigations into alleged violations of the state Sunshine Law and wire-tapping claims. That background goes a long way to explaining why the mayor is refusing to respect the firing of his law director.

Never change, New Jersey.

Records: Trenton law director called clerk Matthew Conlon a ‘dumb f*ck’, threatened to fight him [Trentonian]


HeadshotJoe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

Can We Escape The Travails Of 2020 By Moving To The Moon?

After a difficult year marked by the threat of nuclear war, a pandemic, and a nail-biting election, many Americans have begun to seriously consider whether they should move to another country. Others have taken note of the discovery of water on the moon and have started to consider leaving planet Earth altogether and moving to the moon. Disregarding whether science has progressed to the point that civilians can safely live on the moon, there is an underlying legal question of whether it is legally permissible to do so.

The main treaty currently dominating the international space field is the Outer Space Treaty (OST) signed in 1967. Since then, it has been nearly impossible to generate enough international consensus to create new and updated laws on the commercialization and property ownership of space and the moon. The relevant provision on whether we can move to space and start building a community far from the troubles on Earth is Article II of the OST. Article II states that “outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.”

However, Article II leads to additional questions. What does “national appropriation” in the context of the moon mean? Does national appropriation apply to individuals and companies occupying parts of the moon or only to a nation claiming territory in space? Does appropriation by a company or an individual moving to the moon constitute national appropriation? Based on commercial space industry practice, the answer is simply, no. Private companies have been arguably claiming territory in space for commercial purposes for decades through satellites, without any objection from the international community.

Since the international community has been unable to agree on a subsequent international agreement governing the appropriation and property ownership of space and the moon, the answer may therefore be that until someone tries to live on the moon we may never know whether it is legally permissible to do so. When Sputnik entered into orbit over the U.S. in 1957, the world looked to President Eisenhower to see the United States’ response. Eisenhower chose instead to tacitly accept Sputnik and thus established the foundation of space law today that the rules of spacecraft are different to those for aircraft. The question of property ownership on the moon may therefore not be answered until someone actually attempts to live or build on the moon.

Overall, it seems that there is currently no answer as to whether we can pack up our bags and escape to a place far, far, away on another planet. But perhaps there is some solace in knowing that as the law stands right now, one day, we may be able to.


Maya Cohen is an associate at Balestriere Fariello and has a background
in international law and arbitration. She focuses her practice on
complex litigation from investigations to trials and appeals. You can
reach her via email at maya.cohen@balestrierefariello.com.

Today Is ‘Love Your Lawyer Day’ — And It’s Completely Stupid

What’s that patch on your head? Were you injured in an accident? (Public Domain Image)

Ed. note (11/6/2020): Today is this year’s installment of Love Your Lawyer Day so here are our thoughts from 2015 on this issue.

Were you aware of the entirely made-up holiday that is “Love Your Lawyer Day”? Because it’s today. Don’t you feel more loved already?

The brainchild of a legal marketer way back in 2001 and now championed by the American Bar Association Law Practice Council, “Love Your Lawyer Day” is the legal profession’s latest desperate plea for a symbolic hug from a cold and uncaring public.

Get ready for at least one impassioned thinkpiece about how Shakespeare’s “kill all the lawyers” was some sort of compliment!

Per Big Law Business:

Founded in 2001 by Nader Anise, a legal marketer, the group is the driving force behind Love Your Lawyer Day, in which everyone around the world is encouraged to post photos and comments on Twitter, with the hash tag, #LoveYourLawyerDay, professing their deep love for lawyers.

Already, the hash tag is being used by various bar associations, lawyers and legal journalists.

“The reality is that lawyers are, for the most part, vilified in our society,” said Anise. “This day is about recognizing them, appreciating them and thanking them.”

Are you kidding me? A holiday to appreciate people created and promoted by those same people. If you’re this desperate for validation, you’ve got deeper issues than “being a lawyer.” Please don’t drag the rest of us into your Sarlacc pit of need.

Now before all those hardened screamers out there who fancy themselves above all this feelgoodism begin applauding, screw you too. Not only is the whole “attorneys as mean-spirited, selfish pricks” persona exactly the kind of childish jackassery that erodes public respect for the profession, but it’s also why we have to listen to so many bad jokes and arthouse whining. We get it, curmudgeons: you’re special snowflakes who nobody respects, so who needs ’em anyway! If there’s any justice, these lawyers will be relegated to the Ninth Circle where they can yell “Objection!” repeatedly while they helplessly watch The Beast devour their clients for all eternity.

But as much as the profession needs the jerks like a hole in the head, lawyers also don’t need some Kumbaya drum circle of a holiday to celebrate how f**king lovable they supposedly are. At their most full of themselves, lawyers will gladly tell anyone they meet that attorneys shape and protect civil society. Is that important? Yeah. Do lawyers need to be celebrated for it? No. It’s the damn job. Not to get all Colonel Jessup, but after lawyers allow the public to sleep under the blanket of the very freedom they provide — we don’t need “love” — we’d prefer you just said thank you and went on your way.

If society really wants to honor its Lawyer-Americans, how about some actual relief for students taking on historic levels of debt under a broken model of legal education? Or an influx of cash for the public defenders and Legal Aid lawyers on the front lines defending the indigent? The bulk of the profession will take your appreciation in cash instead of a dumb holiday.

So stuff your platitudes — lawyers have work to do.

A Day for Spreading Love to Lawyers Everywhere [Big Law Business / Bloomberg BNA]

Earlier: Lawyer Asks Teacher What He Makes And Had To Listen To Some Dumb Poem

America Not The Only Thing Putting Painful Chapter Behind It This Week

Morning Docket: 11.06.20

(Image via Getty)

* A lawsuit has been filed over the rights to Breakfast at Tiffany’s. “And I said, ‘what about Breakfast at Tiffany’s?’”… [Deadline]

* An Ohio lawyer is facing ethics charges because he allegedly offered to exchange legal services for a client cleaning the lawyer’s home in the nude. [ABA Journal]

* An purported extra-marital affair of the Attorney General of Texas is being connected to criminal allegations against the official. [U.S. News and World Report]

* Check out this article on the latest status of election lawsuits filed by the Trump Campaign. [Fox News]

* The Michigan Attorney General pleaded with residents to stop telling election officials to shove sharpies in their butts. Michigan residents sure are creative. [New York Post]


Jordan Rothman is a partner of The Rothman Law Firm, a full-service New York and New Jersey law firm. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jordan@rothmanlawyer.com.

New Site Helps Lawyers Get Clients – And Then Provides Free Software To Manage Them | LawSites

A website launched this summer aims to address the justice gap by making it easier for clients to find the right lawyer and by providing lawyers — primarily solos — with free practice management software to reduce their cost of providing legal services.

On the front end, Xira is a lawyer-matching site through which clients can search for lawyers who match their legal issue and budget, and then directly book a consultation with the lawyer they choose and meet with that lawyer in a Zoom video call.

On the back-end, Xira is a no-cost and no-obligation service for lawyers that provides free access to a suite of cloud-based practice management software that includes case management, time management, document management, electronic invoicing, online calendaring and booking, and secure messaging.

It even includes the cost of Zoom audio and video calls with clients, regardless of whether the clients originated through Xira.

The only cost to the lawyer is a fee of $30 for a new client booking, incurred when a client finds, books and meets the lawyer on Xira.

In addition, if a lawyer opts for the ability to receive electronic payments of invoices through Xira, there is a charge for that service of $10 per month.

A lawyer can can also elect to increase document storage from the standard 2Gb that comes free to 100Gb for an additional $10 a month. But these charges are entirely optional.

Founder Reza Ghaffari, who was formerly chief operating officer of telecommunications company Coriant until its 2018 acquisition by competitor Infinera for $430 million, sees Xira as a vehicle to help solo lawyers be more successful by operating more efficiently.

Ghaffari sees a legal market in which a large number of lawyers have gone out on their own, often virtually and many part-time. At the same time, there are large numbers of consumers who are not getting the legal help they need.

“Let’s put these together,” Ghaffari said of his reason for founding Xira. “Let’s provide a product that helps solos expand their practice. We also wanted to create a place to make it simple for users to find the right advice they want.”

Searching For A Lawyer

For clients in search of a lawyer, Xira provides several filtering options to help them find the right match of an attorney who concentrates in their area of need.

They start on the home page by entering the type of legal issue they have and their state. That search opens a results page showing brief profiles of the lawyers who match (or cards, as Xira calls them). These profiles show the lawyers’ rate for an initial consultation, standard billing rate, and next-available meeting time.

The client receives immediate confirmation of the scheduled consultation.

The order in which attorneys appear on the results page is randomized to give a fair shot to all attorneys on the platform. The  client can click through a profile to see a lawyer’s full biography, which includes more details about the lawyer’s practice, experience and fees, as well as an expanded live calendar of available meeting times.

On the search results page, filters enable clients to narrow results in several ways:

  • By availability to meet, ranging from immediately to within 30 days.
  • By hourly rate.
  • By those who offer free consultations.
  • By those who offer flat fees or contingency fees.
  • By ratings.
  • By languages spoken.

Once the client selects a lawyer, the client picks a meeting time from the calendar that shows the lawyer’s availability and receives immediate confirmation.

The platform allows clients to rate attorneys they use and those ratings are available to others who come to the site. For attorneys who are new to the site, Xira will help them import ratings from other sites such as Google, Yelp or Avvo.

Managing Clients and Cases

For attorneys using Xira, their starting-off point is a dashboard where they can manage their cases, billing, messaging, and other activities.

Lawyers manage their cases and consultations through a dashboard.

When a new client books a consultation through Xira, the client receives confirmation immediately and the appointment appears immediately in the lawyer’s Xira calendar. Xira can synchronize with calendars in Office 365, Google and iCloud. The attorney clicks on the calendar appointment to see the client’s details.

Xira allows the attorney to control the timing of bookings. The attorney can set a minimum amount of advance notice and set breaks or buffers between meetings.

When the time comes for the meeting, both the attorney and client are put in a lobby until the meeting starts. At the scheduled time, they can each join the meeting.

Xira’s platform includes a document vault for each case.

If the client retains the attorney, the attorney can then open a new case case in Xira and manage its activity and billing through the platform. For each new case, a document folder is also created. The client gets access to this folder and is notified whenever the attorney adds a document. The client can read and download documents, but cannot delete them.

Each case also includes secure messaging where the lawyer and client can exchange text messages.

Xira also provides a mobile app in which all of these features are available.

Future Development

Xira formally launched in July in California, and so far that is where it has centered its marketing to consumers and where most of the listed lawyers are located. Later this year, it will expand its marketing to New York and Florida, and plans eventually more broadly.

In the meantime, lawyers in any state are free to register for the site, which costs nothing and takes less than 10 minutes.

Xira also plans to build out the ecosystem of legal professionals who use the platform so that attorneys could associate with each other for temporary assignments or refer cases to each other. The plan would also provide lawyers with access to paralegals through the platform.

The company is currently seeking angel funding to help finance its marketing and development plans.

Bottom Line

It costs literally nothing for an attorney to sign up with Xira. For that nothing, attorneys get a practice management platform, audio and video conferencing, and the potential of new clients. Only if a client books a consultation and meets with the attorney is there a fee, and then it is a relatively minimal $30.

To be clear, Xira’s practice management software is not a full-featured platform that could support a law firm. It is designed for solos. There is no ability to connect one lawyer’s Xira account with that of others in the same firm or to share calendars, tasks or documents with colleagues.

But for a solo, Xira is a platform worth checking out. I’ll repeat that a lawyer can use this to manage all the lawyer’s cases, not just those that come in through Xira. That includes the online scheduling and videoconferencing. Need to schedule a meeting with a current client? Send the client to Xira to book time on your calendar.

“The long-term vision is to make the practice of solos more efficient so they can have more billable hours,” Ghaffari told me. “If they have more billable hours and fewer operating costs, then maybe they will reduce their prices, so many people who need legal advice will be able to get it.”

Random Neural Firings About Diversity And Discrimination 

Alexandra Wilson, a young barrister in London who handles criminal and family law defense matters, experiences the same types of conduct that women lawyers, especially women lawyers of color, are subjected to there and everywhere: being mistaken for a defendant on three separate occasions on the same day, being told by a courtroom clerk to wait outside until her case was called, being chastised by an older white male prosecutor who chided her for wanting to speak with her client and requesting details in court documents. Any issue about failure to zealously represent her client if she didn’t do so? I guess in the mind of the older white male there was no need to vigorously defend her client. In the minds of the three persons who made unwarranted assumptions about her, a woman barrister of color and a defendant look the same.

Outrageous? Of course. The British court issued an apology and said it would be investigating as a “matter of urgency.” While appreciative of the apology, the issue, as Wilson put it, is whether anything would change because of the three separate incidents on the same day. What do you think? Any more credence than the poll numbers in the election?

I have been mistaken for a court reporter on numerous occasions, a social worker and a client, not to mention the number of times I was mistaken for a secretary, a note taker, a copy/file clerk, or coffee Sherpa. What is especially galling is that men (and I call out men on this) don’t seem to see women as equals in the profession. That is changing, albeit slowly, certainly not fast enough for those who are impacted by the discrimination.

Just as here, in England, Blacks compose a majority of the incarcerated population, while representing only a minute percentage of the lawyer population. As Wilson notes, it’s so important for kids to see Black female lawyers; growing up, she didn’t and she wanted to.

It’s just as important for citizens to see people on the bench that look like them. And as part of a full court press (sorry, I couldn’t resist), the Los Angeles Superior Court is establishing a judicial mentoring program. For years, there have been various programs put on by various bar associations under the rubric “So you want to be a judge” or words to that effect. This program will, I think, carry a lot more gravitas because it has the court’s imprimatur and participation. California Supreme Court nominee Justice Martin Jenkins, who has been Governor Gavin Newsom’s appointments secretary, has “guided the Newsom Administration’s efforts to build a judiciary that reflects the people they serve.” Yay!!!

There will be a standing committee composed of a diverse group of judges to identify, encourage, and provide mentors for all individuals considering a judicial career. Here in California, attorneys must have been in practice for 10 years before they can even apply for an appointment to the Superior Court or to run for a judicial office.

The court says that the “…goal of the program is to convey to the legal community the uniform message of Governor Newsom’s commitment to appointing a highly capable bench reflective of the rich diversity of the state.” How diverse? California is a minority-majority state.

No race or ethnic group constitutes a majority of California’s population: 39% of state residents are Latino, 37% are white, 15% are Asian American, 6% are African American, 3% are multiracial, and fewer than 1% are American Indian or Pacific Islander, according to the 2018 American Community Survey. Latinos surpassed whites as the state’s single largest ethnic group in 2014.

A judicial mentoring program is overdue. For years, lawyers, bar associations, and others have wrung their hands over the lack of diversity in the lawyer population and thus, among the judicial population. There have been efforts to fill the diversity pipeline, even starting as early as high school. Did you know in high school that you wanted to be a lawyer?

The American Lawyer Diversity Scorecard for 2020 shows some improvement, but it’s nothing to jump up and down about. The AMLAW scorecard looks at the top 200 firms. Seventy-one firms had at least 20% minority lawyers, so, by my rough calculation, that’s one in three. Seven percent (not a typo) had at least 20% minority partners for a grand total of 14 firms. (Go ahead, check my math.) Not a very impressive track record for those firms who try to position themselves as welcoming diverse professionals.

And if we needed to be reminded yet again of the disparities between men and women, majority and minority lawyers, recent findings of the National Association for Law Placement show that men are still paid more than women (no surprise there), and Black law graduates still have lower levels of success in the job market than other graduates. Also no surprise.

“Shonda” in Jewish usage means “shame,” “disgrace.” Let’s use “shonda” in a sentence: It’s a shonda that the legal profession is still so far behind where it should be in terms of diversity and inclusion. What is so difficult about all this? The lack of progress mystifies me as I am sure it does many others. Race and gender, as Alexandra Wilson’s story shows, still permeate what we do and how we do it. That’s a “shonda.” The Superior Court’s judicial mentoring program will help. Identifying talent is an important first step toward a bench that will look more like California.


Jill Switzer has been an active member of the State Bar of California for over 40 years. She remembers practicing law in a kinder, gentler time. She’s had a diverse legal career, including stints as a deputy district attorney, a solo practice, and several senior in-house gigs. She now mediates full-time, which gives her the opportunity to see dinosaurs, millennials, and those in-between interact — it’s not always civil. You can reach her by email at oldladylawyer@gmail.com.

New November CLE: Post-Election Analysis, Remote Mediations, and More

The holidays (and many CLE deadlines) are quickly approaching! While this year’s holiday season will be slightly atypical, Lawline continues to produce an ongoing lineup of great CLE to help you with your practice. With topics ranging from cannabis e-commerce and conducting remote mediations, there’s a relevant program for everyone this November. Check out some upcoming highlights below:

  • Cannabis E-Commerce: Legal and Regulatory Problems and Solutions for Online Marketing and Sales. There are many state and federal laws, regulations, and polices, which all restrict cannabis businesses in a number of – sometimes conflicting – ways. This program will review the effects on cannabis businesses of the California Consumer Privacy Act, the Telephone Consumer Privacy Act, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Americans with Disabilities Act – and more. Airing November 10, 2020 at 3:30 p.m. (EST)
  • 2020 Post-Election Analysis: State of the Race, Ballot Access, and Election-Based Litigation. The 2020 Election is gearing up to be one of the biggest in our country’s history. This program will review efforts made by officials to ensure safe ballot access in the midst of a global pandemic, highlights of election-related litigation, changes to the voting process, post-election matters, and more. Airing November 16, 2020 at 1:00 p.m. (EST)
  • Conducting Effective Remote Mediations. Remote proceedings have defined 2020, and it is becoming increasingly clear that they are here to stay in some fashion, even after the pandemic ends. This program will teach attorneys critical skills for conducting successful remote mediations. Airing November 30, 2020 at 11:30 a.m. (EST)

If you can’t attend a live webcast, don’t worry! All of our courses go on-demand within 48 hours after airing (and you can check them out with our free trial). Check out some recent highlights:

Related Content:

  1. The Top 5 CLE Virginia Attorneys Are Watching Right Now
  2. How to Conduct Virtual Arbitrations and Mediations
  3. The Impaired Lawyer: A Call for Action