Date: January 26th, 2007 1:07 AM Author: Puce useless brakes piazza
y'all know why he threw in an antitrust claim at the end, right? TREBLE DAMAGES! Lucky he thought of it and remembered to throw it in #35 - right before the damages section. Brilliant.
Favorite complaint: ""Upon information and belief, the system of course examination and grading at the law school in certain exams disadvantaged students that could not type at a sufficient speed to produce the volume of text required to produce competitive examination responses."
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:54 PM Author: Territorial marvelous locale
"As a resulft of Defendant's acitons, Plaintiff Maria Zack, a retired school teacher, suffered significant economic, emotional, and reputational damages, as well as a significant disruption in retirement and life plan."
But the woman is a RETIRED schoolteacher. That suggests it's his mom...unless his sister/wife has just as many obvious emotional & psychological problems and was forced to "retire" early.
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:26 AM Author: Mauve Motley Hospital Internal Respiration Subject: typing speed?
I still bluebook my exams while 99% of the class types away on laptops. Yet I still Pwned them all by getting all A's. This guy sounds like a loser who can't face the reality of his deficiency.
Date: January 25th, 2007 8:01 PM Author: greedy base
I dunno, despite that this complaint is ridiculous. I think the writing is pretty good (verbose at times, though). Maybe I will get my ass kicked at the firm.
First sentence of #15 - impede AZ's efforts to obtain employment by refusing opportuinty to clarify "certain apparently false information in his employment record"
EDIT: I suppose this could mean the employment record from MNAT. Never mind.
Basically, he's claiming that the firm is a state actor because one of the member of the firm used to hold a government position at some time in the past.
Dood, that's great, but you're missing the true magnum opus of ADRIAN ZACK's complaint: the masterful, quasi symphonic way in which he joins his complaint against MNAT (the firm) to that against Michigan. I commend to you the climax of this movement, paragraph #33:
"Plaintiffs believe there is some nexus between the actions of MNAT defendants, other unnamed or current MNAT employees, or unnamed individuals otherwise associated with MNAT defendants, and the actions of the University of Michigan defendants, other unnamed current or former University employees, STUDENTS [my emphasis], or individuals otherwise associated with University Defendants, in furtherance of conspiracy."
HOW CAN YOU ARGUE WITH ADRIAN ZACK? ADRIAN ZACK SEES THE WHEELS WITHIN THE WHEELS.
I just got to that. I would love to hear his explanation of how Michigan and MNAT got together to co-conspire. But I don't actually know if that's what he's claiming. He may just be an idiot and not realize that two unconnected entities harming the same victim in a similar way aren't co-conspirators by default, simply because the manner of harm inflicted happens to be similar.
This guy graduated, however low-ranked, from the UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN. Do you think he seriously failed to realize the requirements for a conspiracy? He can't even demonstrate that these two groups knew each other in any sense.
Besides, the manner of harm isn't even similar. Michigan just GRADEPWN3D him (and not even badly enough that he wasn't able to get a 2L summer job, I might point out), while MNAT apparently booted him out of that job before it was done.
Imagine that. Imagine being SO bad that they don't even let you finish up your 2L summer job, but actually physically escort you from the premises before it's over. My god, what was he doing, sniffing all the women's seats and constantly claiming he "smelled sex on them?"
"This guy graduated, however low-ranked, from the UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN. Do you think he seriously failed to realize the requirements for a conspiracy?"
Did you see his attempt to get MNAT counted as a state actor?!?!!? I don't think this guy learned very much law in law school. Perhaps because he couldn't take hand written notes fast enough. Ah, another allegation to add to the complaint!
Date: December 23rd, 2007 11:41 PM Author: Arousing abusive address personal credit line
Maybe there is more to the conspiracy than meets the eye, and he'll use the discovery period to drum out the connections between the two entities. Maybe he doesn't want to put all of his cards on the table in the complaint.
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:18 PM Author: Burgundy rehab clown
But what are the chances that TWO UNCONNECTED ENTITIES would both have it out for THE SAME PERSON? Like, Michigan gives him bad grades, and then his firm doesn't even give him an offer? It must be conspiracy. The thing speaks for itself. And if it doesn't speak for itself, Zack will speak for the thing.
Date: January 29th, 2007 11:37 AM Author: Harsh Temple
Yeah. Maria Zack is clearly his wife who ditched her public school teaching job the minute his first BIGLAW paycheck came in. "Emotional stress" = gained 30 pounds.
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:11 PM Author: trip station
do you think that means this guy is handicapped? im thinking either handicapped or a veteran... and thus favors the UMich system when it took all that into account and assigned large amts of points to those applicants
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:01 PM Author: House-broken indecent lay
18. "Certain exams taken by Mr. Zack that required students to be skilled touch-typists in order to produce a competetive response resulted in borderline failing gradesby virtue of the low volumbe of prose Mr. Zack could type in the time allotted as compared with other students."
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:03 PM Author: Territorial marvelous locale
"Due to the legal and other expertise required to determine the correct legal taxonomy and nomenclature for such damages, and to estimate a reasonable valuation for each category of damages and the overall total, Plaintiffs cannot plead damages with any more specifity at this time."
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:04 PM Author: Henna Buck-toothed Mother
34. Plaintiff Adrian Zack has devoted significant time and effort to searching for permanent employment during the five years since the fall of 2001. Such efforts have been especially intense during the last two and one-half years since Mr. Zack's graduation from law school.
THAT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE OUT TO GET ADRIAN ZACK. ADRIAN ZACK HAS SEEN THROUGH THE LIES AND THE SMOKESCREENS AND CAN EXPOSE THESE PEOPLE. THEY CAN'T LET THAT HAPPEN, AND SO ARE CONSPIRING TO CRUSH ADRIAN ZACK.
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:06 PM Author: House-broken indecent lay
25. "Charlotte Johnson, among other actions, without credible justification denied Mr. Zack accomadation during a 24-hour exam when he was forced to take an approximately two-hour break during the exam to handle a personal matter that unexpectedly and unavoidable [sic?] arose."
He's really thrown in the kitchen sink at Mich Law. He's got an associate dean of students in there for not giving him an extension on a 24 hour take home because of a personal matter. He's got career services in there for giving him bad career advice. He's got a civ pro prof in there for poor email communications. This is hilarious.
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:14 PM Author: Burgundy rehab clown
Actually, words describe it pretty well. I mean, it is itself composed of only words. You're just saying that because the volume of your typing is insufficient. ;)
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:12 PM Author: scarlet hell
he has one point - that his former employers should give him access to people for recomendations, and should not make unsolicited negative recomendations.
Date: January 26th, 2007 9:28 AM Author: cream french gas station faggot firefighter
Never a good idea to give negative recommendations unless something like embezzlement was the cause for dismissal and they were caught red handed. Creates too much liability for the employer. Remember this when coaching clients. BTW - most fortune 500 HR Departments don't give negative recommendations - they just say something like, "so and so worked here from X to Y in the position of Z." That is all they'll say and that is code for don't hire this fucking guy.
"A former employee sued her former employer for unlawful retaliation under Title VII. At trial, the former employee demonstrated the former employer provided negative recommendations to a prospective employer in retaliation for the employee's prior discrimination complaints. The jury found in favor of the employee and awarded her $25,000. However, the trial court rejected the verdict because it found she did not prove that due to the negative references she suffered an adverse employment action. According to the trial court, in order to make this showing, the employee had to prove that she would have received the prospective job but for the employer's negative references.
The Tenth Circuit held that the district court erred in requiring the former employee to meet this standard. The Tenth Circuit lessened the employee's burden of proof, holding that in order to prove an adverse action occurred because of negative references, the employee must only show that the negative references would likely preclude her from obtaining employment with the prospective employer. In this case, the prospective employer testified that negative information would have disqualified a candidate for the position (but the negative references were not the reason for its decision not to hire the former employee – the prospective employer claimed that the plaintiff was not hired because her long fingernails would have interfered with her typing speed!). The Tenth Circuit found the former employee proved that she suffered an adverse employment action due to the former employer's negative references. Accordingly, it reinstated the $25,000 jury verdict in favor of the employee."
Not sure about that. This isn't a classic no-offer situation. This was a mid-summer firing. And there may be a reason, depending on what happened that got him fired, why the firm doesn't want any of it's current employees endorsing the guy in their capacity as a firm employee.
As for the unsolicited negative recs, I have no idea how he could know that. Chances are, it's made up, just like his claim that the firm fired him as part of a conspiracy.
12(b)(6)? In state court? That is not the credited response. Not sure about DE state procedural rules, but most states do not have motions to dismiss with as much teeth as the FRCPs. Still, the only claims not clearly subject to demurrer are IIPEA and conspiracy.
Edited: DE state court.
Edited: conspiracy generally requires an agreement, intent, and an underlying wrong. Some states do not even require participation to identified specifically. Agreement can be generally averred.
ADRIAN ZACK HAS SEEN THROUGH THE FARCE THAT IS CAREER SERVICES:
"26. Defendants Robin A. Kaplan and Susan M. Guindi advised Mr. Zack on his job search, and certain advice was highly disadvantageous to his particular circumstances. Regardless whether or not such advice was intended by these Defendants to harm Adrian Zack, the Law School, and these two Defendants in their capacities as its employees working in the Office of Career Services, should have known such advice would be significantly harmful to Mr. Zack's pursuit of employment."
ADRIAN ZACK WASN'T FOOLED BY OCS'S RECOMMENDATION THAT HE NOT TALK ABOUT THE ZIONIST-MASONIC ELDERS CONSPIRACY DURING ON-CAMPUS INTERVIEWS. OCS TRIED TO GET ADRIAN ZACK TO HOLD BACK THE TRUTH. NOBODY HOLDS BACK ADRIAN ZACK, ADRIAN ZACK'S ON A PLAINTIFF ATTACK.
Conspiracy is linked to IIPEA, which is an intentional tort. Although not carefully explained, he is claiming IIPEA against Univ defendants and law firm defendants individually. And conspiracy to committ same against defendants as a group (that's the "magnum opus" paragraph 33), the Univ defendants (agreement provision unclear, and perhaps not pled). His claims that certain un-named conspirators could have un-intentionally further the scheme is absurd, though. Their lack of intent would patently make them non-conspirators.
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:33 PM Author: primrose library
This is jogging a memory, but I'm not sure if it's a valid one (the age and the HAM radio thing are sparking it, if that helps anyone). About two years ago, wasn't the ridicule-of-the-moment a non-trad male who received no callbacks and then proceeded to write a very detailed letter to the firms outlining the fact that he once worked for some district county juvenile court judge and she could vouch that his legal writing was "among the finest she'd ever seen?"
Is this the same guy?? Someone else must remember this...
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:37 PM Author: primrose library
It would be too good to be true and I have no legitimate reason for conflating the two incidents other than I could have sworn HAM radios were brought up in each instance. Of course, I suppose that HAM radio enthusiasts are, on average, more prone to this sort of shit.
BEWARE GTO. ADRIAN ZACK IS PREPARED TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT ADDING XOXO TO THE LIST OF CONSPIRATORS ATTEMPTING TO DIMINISH THE EXPECTED ECONOMIC VALUE OF ADRIAN ZACK'S MICHIGAN LAW DEGREE.
YOU ARE TWO SUBPOENAS AWAY FROM A NEVERENDING NIGHTMARE OF LITIGATION. ADRIAN ZACK WILL TAKE YOUR YACHT. *TOOT* *TOOT* YOU TTTSEF.
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:06 PM Author: Provocative tank school
cf. Robinson v. Univ. of Akron Sch. of Law, 307 F.3d 409 (student who suffered from a "learning disability" was given 25% more time to complete his exam; student requested "unlimited additional time" to complete his exams); Clement v. Virginia Bd. of Bar Examiners, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 27951 (bar applicant claiming a learning disability is given twice the normal time to complete the bar exam and still fails).
Right. So... Let me get this straight: it was his poor typing skills, not his apparent inability to logic, that caused him to perform poorly in law school.
Wonder what he did to get escorted from the building his 2L summer?
Claims against law firm defendants = stale?
Edit: Not clear the claims are time-barred. Clever Zack attempted a tolling section at the end of the Complaint. But did he adequately plead any act to induce forbearance? Plus there are no dates given for paragraphs 14 & 15, so hard to show time-bar on the face of the Complaint.
Date: January 26th, 2007 1:05 AM Author: Naked ladyboy
"Edit: Not clear the claims are time-barred. Clever Zack attempted a tolling section at the end of the Complaint. But did he adequately plead any act to induce forbearance? Plus there are no dates given for paragraphs 14 & 15, so hard to show time-bar on the face of the Complaint. "
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:12 PM Author: Provocative tank school
What is with law school students?
"Holman alleged numerous violations of his constitutional rights by employees of U.C. Berkeley . . . including being placed in a room where loud drilling occurred nearby on the day before a law school exam, being told that he "would make a good lawyer," . . . and being pressured to pay his bills promptly."
Holman v. Board of Regents of University of California, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 20815
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:18 PM Author: Provocative tank school
Grafton v. Brooklyn Law School, 478 F.2d 1137
"For the fall semester of 1970-71 Grafton received another D+ average; this included an F in a 3-credit course in taxation. Grafton claims that the taxation final examination was so contrived that the grading professor could pass or fail any student as he desired, and that staff members of The Justinian received lower grades than others taking the same course."
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:23 PM Author: hideous iridescent dysfunction house
This guy has the markings to become the law school version of dylan klebold. UMich law should be worried about this nut job. Despite his JD/MBA, he basically sucks at life then blames everyone else but himself. I'm surprised he didn't blame USC as well for the emotional distress caused by the ass raping USC gave Mich at the Rose Bowl a few weeks ago. Maybe that should be #46.
but you're right about him killing folks while in law school
"In 1975, while still attending law school at the University of Utah, Bundy shifted his crimes to Colorado"
"Bundy bought a one-way plane ticket and flew TWA from Denver to Chicago the night he escaped. He then caught an Amtrak train to Ann Arbor, Michigan," - coincidence?
Date: January 25th, 2007 10:41 PM Author: Racy bawdyhouse
Shit, this is nothing. You should see what some of the wacko "jailhouse lawyers" file. I had the boyfriend of a client try to sue me because I refused to file a motion claiming that she had diplomatic immunity from prosecution due to her status as the biblical concubine to the ambassador to the kingdom of yaweh.
Date: January 25th, 2007 11:37 PM Author: multi-colored embarrassed to the bone principal's office mental disorder
The Real Story: This is a dumb and slightly deranged white guy who, through some bizarre rationalization, checked the african-american box and got some massive AA to get into Michigan.
He got terrible grades at Michigan because he wasn't qualified to be there in the first place. However, he was still able to land a job, albiet a shitty one, purely off the fact that he was a Michigan student.
At his job, he proceeded tell extremely racist jokes at inappropriate times, thinking he could get away with it because he was 'african-american.' Too bad everyone else correctly saw him as 'white.'
Date: January 26th, 2007 12:27 AM Author: lilac hilarious space
before you gang up on michigan, you should know he went to Yale undergrad. He must have some intelligece, or really good connections. Although, you can't tell from that horrible complaint. I have seen pro se plaintiffs with no law degree write better complaints.
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:11 AM Author: coiffed tan associate
does anyone know what this guy's roundabout rationalization for claiming to be african american are? if he was smart, he woulda just claimed to be native american like a lot of supposedly nonwhite ppl at top schools do.
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:26 AM Author: multi-colored embarrassed to the bone principal's office mental disorder
This is so incredibly wrong. Many schools, and also the government, actually have a definition for what it means to be Native American (must be recognized by a tribe or have 1/16 native american blood, or whatever).
Neither law school nor the government, however, have a definition for "hispanic" or "african-american" - it's 100% self-selection. It's really, really, hard to prove someone isn't african-american or hispanic if they claim they are, because they can just say "yeah, my great-great-grandmother was black, so I consider myself black." There is no 1/16 rule or anything for african-american or hispanic.
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:29 AM Author: coiffed tan associate
the 1/16 rule is absurd. there were a lot of guys i knew in college that were white for all intensive purposes but found out they were 1/16 and milked it for all it was worth.
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:47 AM Author: insanely creepy office
the 1/16 rule is absurd. there were a lot of guys i knew in college that were white for all "intensive purposes" but found out they were 1/16 and milked it for all it was worth.
For what "intensive purposes" would it be helpful to be white?
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:55 AM Author: coiffed tan associate
if u thought u were white all ur life and everyone else thinks ur white and u didn't live on a goddamn reservation, what's the point of giving u AA just cuz u found out ur great great great grandmother was a mohegan?
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:57 AM Author: insanely creepy office
I'm making fun of the "for all intensive purposes" line, dood, not making a statement about Indian AA.
EDIT: I think all racial prrferences are horseshit, but if the adcoms are going to give boosts to African royalty and black students that grew up in Bel-Air for "facing discrimination" then you can't bust someone's hustle for digging up grandpa's tribal card.
Date: January 26th, 2007 4:04 PM Author: insanely creepy office
It's usually 1/4th, but few colleges would screw with you if you have a tribal affiliation card--which is very easy in some states. Read:
Tuesday, May 26, 1998 - Seattle Times
by Tom Brune
Seattle Times staff reporter
Elizabeth Lake says she has always thought of herself as a Native American.
So two years ago, when filling out a state-government job application that asked her race or culture, she didn't think twice about checking the box labeled "American Indian."
She eventually landed a job with the Department of Social and Health Services. But within the first week, a supervisor pulled Lake out of a training session.
"She said she could not visibly determine my race," recalls Lake, who has long, dark hair, dark eyes and a light complexion.
The supervisor told Lake she had been hired to meet an affirmative-action goal for American Indians, and that if she could not prove her race, the job offer would be withdrawn.
The next day, Lake brought in documents showing her great-grandfather was a member of the Chickasaw Nation.
But her supervisors told her she needed proof that she was a member of a tribe - and that she had a month to produce it.
She didn't. She lost her job.
Lake has since learned she is 1/128th Chickasaw Indian, enough for her to get a tribal-affiliation card, sufficient documentation for the state.
Date: January 26th, 2007 10:28 AM Author: dashing underhanded theater stage
Holy shit. Done before his law school career even began?!
I will trade legendary stories about Cass Sunstein being PWN3D by his wife at UChicago Wine Mess with anyone who can offer more reliable details of this no doubt classic Michigan moment.
Date: January 26th, 2007 9:36 AM Author: multi-colored embarrassed to the bone principal's office mental disorder
In all seriousness, there was nothing even remotely racist about what I said. I was just spinning a good story. But yes, I was lying about the Michigan student. I have no clue who he is or why he got fired.
Date: January 26th, 2007 10:16 AM Author: dashing underhanded theater stage
Fucker. I totally thought you were serious.
Thing is, you could have offered nearly any story about this guy, however nuts, and I would've accepted it given that he had already demonstrated a capacity for six-sigma weirdness.
Date: January 26th, 2007 11:01 AM Author: Nofapping Passionate Windowlicker
All these suits against lawsuits by former students are hilarious. Did anyone major in classics? These actions represent the eternal recurrence of the paradox of Protagoras' lawsuit against Euathlus --if these students can win pro se lawsuits against law schools (who have plenty of legal talent on tap) then they obviously *did* receive a decent legal education, contrary to their claims, and should therefore receive no damages.
Date: January 26th, 2007 11:08 AM Author: Nofapping Passionate Windowlicker
True. However, I would invoke (primary) assumption of risk: Isn't it patently obvious that the BigLaw refugees and other assorted mutts in the career services office don't have a clue?
Date: January 26th, 2007 3:09 PM Author: Crawly Nubile Jew
From the comments it seems that this story has some very very interesting background that is well known in Wilmington. Come on, someone's gotta spill...
Damn, they're talking about some dark background secrets...I must know. Get on the control-room radio of the S.S. Big Changes, GTO - we need to find out.
Did anyone catch the paragraph where he says this PRIVATE employer violated his "due process" rights by firing him without a hearing? Good god some people are morons. I can't believe someone can get all the way thru umich ls and not understand that only gov't can violate your due process rights.
Additionally, I'm sick of people just not being able to swallow the fact that employment is "at will" and is so-called for a reason.
Date: March 12th, 2007 3:23 PM Author: Fighting School Cafeteria
why isn't adrian zack a bigger xoxo legend than heide iravani? this adrian zack guy actually did something ridiculous that is worthy of ridicule. not so sure about heide...
Date: December 23rd, 2007 10:33 PM Author: Alcoholic goal in life
Update: Michigan Law School just sent the Law Blog the following statement: At Michigan Law, students generally choose for themselves whether to write examination answers by hand or whether to type on a keyboard (laptop or typewriter). Beyond the typing policy at issue in the lawsuit, every effort is made to ensure fairness and equitability in the grading and evaluation process.