The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Michigan Law grad sues Mich Law and summer firm (PDF complaint!)
Poast new message in this thread
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:39 PM
You guys are just going to loooooove this... something for pretty much everyone in here:
http://www.autoadmit.com/complaint.pdf
Enjoy! |
 |
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:42 PM
Civil conspiracy? Antitrust violations? Intentional interference with prospective business relations? |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:44 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:40 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:50 PM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 1:24 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 2:31 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 2:07 PM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 1:07 AM What a fucking cuntwad. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:42 PM
Plus, Michigan's legal writing program clearly taught this guy well. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:47 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:49 PM I'm guessing this guy is a six-sigma weirdo? As well as being a mamma's boy? |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:51 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 8:28 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:54 PM
i'm pretty sure that means he lives with his mom. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:55 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:55 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:58 PM
Well, a 177 for parsing that out, I suppose. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:00 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:58 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:01 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:02 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:18 PM
Who is Maria Zack??? |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:19 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:39 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:41 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:42 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:43 PM
Which is entirely possible in this case. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:46 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:54 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:02 PM
Think they're regretting that move now? |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:26 AM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 8:01 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:45 PM
It was bound to happen sooner or later. Fucking ridiculous. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:47 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:53 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:59 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:00 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:47 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:50 PM was very strange on the job or fucked up his 2L grades |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:53 PM
To respond in haiku form
you failed horribly |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:18 PM Sorry for the prose, BTW. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:29 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 8:30 PM CRTITCRTITCRTITCR TITCRTIT |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:42 AM
His two-finger-typing ass
Is out in the cold |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 9:50 AM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:52 PM
'fraudulently to manipulate Mr Zack's employment record to develop a basis for dismissal'? |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:54 PM
EDIT: I suppose this could mean the employment record from MNAT. Never mind. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:56 PM
I can only hope I get to work w/a weirdo like this during the summer. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:48 PM
#13 is my favorite, btw. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:51 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:57 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:02 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:59 PM
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. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:10 PM
"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. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:13 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:17 PM
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?" |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:36 PM
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 |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:18 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:22 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:49 PM http://mba.mccombs.utexas.edu/mma/reunion2006/attending.asp http://www.nylawyer.com/display.php/file=/exam/names/000May05rz
If he got an MBA in 96, I'd say that puts him close to 40, yes? |
|
Date: January 29th, 2007 11:37 AM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:49 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:52 PM
i'm a little stoned and tired, making the complaint hard to read. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:52 PM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 3:31 AM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:52 PM http://chronicle.com/indepth/michigan/documents/briefs/respondent/LSDHE.pdf |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:11 PM |
|
Date: January 29th, 2007 11:11 AM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 5:56 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:05 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:01 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:03 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:05 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:12 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:04 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:06 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:03 PM
|
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:07 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:11 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:04 PM
LOL |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:08 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:10 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:14 PM
BUT SOON ADRIAN ZACK WILL CRUSH THEM. |
|
Date: December 23rd, 2007 11:42 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 8:46 PM
he has an mba. no job.
he has a jd from michigan. no job.
he has allegedly been looking for years. no job.
he got fired from a summer job. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:05 PM
Ham Radio operator? |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:19 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:06 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:08 PM
Christ, we should make that one a class action while we're at it! |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:07 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:07 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:08 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:13 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:15 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:21 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:29 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:11 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:14 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:16 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:21 PM
that would change things, in my opinion... there has to be some explanation. i doubt he's just that much of a screwball |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:28 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 8:22 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:10 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:12 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:12 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:13 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:17 PM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 9:28 AM
"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." |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:19 PM
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. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:16 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:17 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:17 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:18 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:25 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:30 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:38 PM
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. |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 1:08 AM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:18 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 8:28 PM |
|
Date: January 29th, 2007 11:40 AM
Probably no attorney's fees, but probably a bar censure. |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 2:54 AM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 8:30 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:18 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:21 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:23 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:24 PM
tyty |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:36 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:25 PM
"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. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:29 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:36 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:29 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:32 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:38 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:42 PM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 9:55 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 10:17 AM |
|
Date: January 29th, 2007 11:42 AM |
|
Date: December 23rd, 2007 10:19 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:29 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 10:07 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:33 PM
Is this the same guy?? Someone else must remember this... |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:34 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:37 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:37 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:46 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:50 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:51 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 8:28 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:40 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:40 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:42 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:44 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:47 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:39 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:47 PM google hints this guy's a ukrainian - i.e. a crazier type of russian. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:52 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:53 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:56 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 7:19 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:54 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:53 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:55 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 8:48 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:56 PM
but not in an I'm-channeling-Zack-interesting kind of way; in a sad, callow kind of way |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:57 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 6:59 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 7:02 PM http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=569671&mc=134&forum_id=2#7485062
|
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 7:03 PM
Okay, no more all-caps Zack impersonations. |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 7:01 PM
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 7:02 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 8:39 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:06 PM
|
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:11 PM
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
He had to type the whole complaint up, didn't he? |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:27 AM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:12 PM
"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 9:15 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:18 PM
"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 29th, 2007 1:43 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:23 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:28 PM
Easley v. University of Michigan Bd. of Regents, 619 F. Supp. 418 |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:55 PM |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 9:55 PM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 1:21 AM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_bundy
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 |
|
Date: January 25th, 2007 11:37 PM 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 |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 12:59 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 9:06 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 1:01 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:11 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:26 AM 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 |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:32 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:33 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:47 AM
For what "intensive purposes" would it be helpful to be white?
Swimming? |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:55 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 8:57 AM
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 9:01 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 11:15 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 4:04 PM
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 8:30 AM
Least favorite part: He left off the part about him destroying a door.
Or am I the only one here who remembers that? |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 9:02 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 10:14 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 10:25 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 10:28 AM
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 9:04 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 9:31 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 9:36 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 10:16 AM
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 |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 11:04 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 11:08 AM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 2:56 PM
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/01/26/slow-typist-sues-his-law-school/ |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 3:01 PM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 3:09 PM |
|
Date: January 26th, 2007 3:21 PM |
|
Date: January 29th, 2007 10:23 AM |
|
Date: January 29th, 2007 10:41 AM |
|
Date: January 29th, 2007 10:48 AM |
|
Date: January 29th, 2007 11:04 AM |
|
Date: January 29th, 2007 2:07 PM
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: January 29th, 2007 2:22 PM |
|
Date: March 12th, 2007 10:23 AM |
|
Date: March 12th, 2007 3:23 PM |
|
Date: December 23rd, 2007 10:29 PM |
|
Date: December 23rd, 2007 10:33 PM |
|
Date: December 23rd, 2007 11:46 PM |
|
Date: December 23rd, 2007 11:20 PM |
|
Date: December 24th, 2007 12:33 AM |