SC

CSOL Likely To Be Sold

The Charleston School of Law (CSOL) – a private institution which has had its share of ups and (mostly) downs in recent years – is likely to be sold to InfiLaw, a company of dubious reputation which specializes in creating “diploma mills.” No formal announcement is expected for several weeks,…

The Charleston School of Law (CSOL) – a private institution which has had its share of ups and (mostly) downs in recent years – is likely to be sold to InfiLaw, a company of dubious reputation which specializes in creating “diploma mills.”

No formal announcement is expected for several weeks, but a representative of the firm addressed the CSOL faculty on Wednesday.

InfiLaw owns at least three other law schools across the nation, including the Phoenix School of Law – which according to Courthouse News is currently in the midst of a protracted legal drama stemming from the company’s management practices.

That drama underscores serious problems at Phoenix and the other two schools owned by InfiLaw – Florida Coastal and the Charlotte School of Law.

“All feature atrocious employment statistics, sky high tuition, enormous class sizes, and graduates with massive debt loads,” writes Paul Campos of the website Lawyers, Guns and Money. “For example, Phoenix’s 2012 graduating class had an average law school debt of nearly $200,000 at repayment, a 2012 entering class of 447, and an estimated cost of attendance of nearly $66,000 per year. Florida Coastal enrolled 580 first years – more than any law school in the country, with the exception of the egregious Thomas J. Cooley. Charlotte offered less ‘scholarship’ money to its students, per capita, than any other law school – in a world where sticker price tuition at law schools is increasingly similar to advertised prices at garage sales, nearly 96 percent of Charlotte’s 2012 class paid full boat, as they say in the used car industry.”

Making matters worse, few of the graduates of these schools are securing the sort of jobs they need to pay back their (mostly) government-backed loans.

“Barely one percent of the graduates at these three schools combined managed to get jobs with even a medium-sized law firm, let alone one of the large national firms that pay the kind of salaries that might possibly justify the tuition charged by these federally-funded rackets,” Campos writes.

We’ve had plenty of not-so-nice things to say about CSOL in recent years. In fact, this website broke the infamous bar exam scam story six years ago – in which the S.C. Supreme Court tossed an entire section of the bar exam in an effort to artificially inflate passage rates at the school.

Why’d they do that? To make sure the school could receive accreditation from the American Bar Association – thus making it a more appealing target for a company like InfiLaw.

At the end of the day, we’ve got no problem with the school’s founders cutting and running – feeding their graduates and students to the wolves at a time when CSOL finally appeared to be making consistent improvements on the bar exam (without the help of corrupt judges).

That’s how the private sector works, people. Assets get sold for what they can fetch on the open market.

Bottom line? There will always be people dumb (or rich) enough to pay more for less – which seems to be the modus operandi of companies like InfiLaw.

It’s just a shame this is happening to CSOL at a time when the school appeared to be getting its act together …

Not surprisingly, sources close to the CSOL faculty tell FITS they are “stunned” by the forthcoming sale.

UPDATE: According to The Charleston (S.C.) Post and Courier, CSOL board chairman and co-founder Alex Sanders has issued a statement saying he is no longer affiliated with the school. The paper is also reporting that a press release regarding the future of the institution will be released sometime later today. 

UPDATE II: It’s official. According to a statement just released by the school, CSOL has entered into “an exciting new alliance that will strengthen its position as a model for American legal education for the 21st century.” Specifically, it has reached “an agreement to engage in a Management Services Agreement with the InfiLaw System, a network of student outcome-focused, independent ABA-approved law schools.”

***

Related posts

SC

Flooding Temporarily Shuts Down Hunting Season In South Carolina

Erin Parrott
Crime & Courts

Combating Human Trafficking: ‘TAT’ Honors South Carolina Store Manager

Will Folks
SC

John-Paul Miller Versus ‘Jesus?’ A Not-So-Holy War Continues

Callie Lyons

176 comments

Squishy123 July 25, 2013 at 9:09 am

The real story is how many of these graduates can pass their local state bar exam? There will be people out there who will continue to pay the tuition just to say they are a lawyer. Sad thing is these same poor idiots would likely make more money working at Walmart.

Reply
Squishy123 July 25, 2013 at 9:09 am

The real story is how many of these graduates can pass their local state bar exam? There will be people out there who will continue to pay the tuition just to say they are a lawyer. Sad thing is these same poor idiots would likely make more money working at Walmart.

Reply
Jeffy01 July 25, 2013 at 9:26 am

hahaha. april fools. You got me for a minute on this post. Then I realized it was a joke. Funny FITS. Charleston has a law school….sure they do. Hilarious

Reply
Squishy123 July 25, 2013 at 1:00 pm

Nearly as funny as USC stating they have a law school. What have they dropped to this year a Tier IV school?

Reply
demarke July 25, 2013 at 5:45 pm

Whatever, USC is Tier II and CSOL is “ranking not published”

Reply
Jeffy01 July 25, 2013 at 9:26 am

hahaha. april fools. You got me for a minute on this post. Then I realized it was a joke. Funny FITS. Charleston has a law school….sure they do. Hilarious

Reply
Squishy123 July 25, 2013 at 1:00 pm

Nearly as funny as USC stating they have a law school. What have they dropped to this year a Tier IV school?

Reply
demarke July 25, 2013 at 5:45 pm

Whatever, USC is Tier II and CSOL is “ranking not published”

Reply
idiotwind July 25, 2013 at 9:35 am

in california if you can pass the bar exam, you’re a lawyer. they don’t care where, or if you went to law school. that makes perfect sense to me. if you can pass the exam, you must possess the knowledge. it does not make sense that the SC bar awards gatekeeper status to a couple of schools. that is a very simple recipe for corruption.

Reply
CL July 25, 2013 at 10:04 am

You are just transferring the gatekeeper function exclusively to the bar examiners. I kind of like having several choke points to weed out the unqualified.

Reply
Frank Pytel July 25, 2013 at 10:23 am

Doctors yes, Lawyers no. To many lawyers involved with law. That’s why its so mucked up. No feeling to it. No intuition. That’s where law has its basis at. Is it wrong or is it illegal?

Reply
CL July 25, 2013 at 10:44 am

The Constitution was drafted by a body that was 2/3 lawyers. It is not that too many lawyers are “involved with law,” it is that too many bad lawyers are involved with the interpretation of the law. And intuition and feelings (or Obama’s risible “empathy” standard) are a terrible basis for making legal determinations. There is an axiom that hard cases make bad law.

Reply
Frank Pytel July 25, 2013 at 10:50 am

BS I’ve read that lawyer crap from you before. Frack You lawyer lover. Fuck all the lawyers. Kill ’em all. Let God send ’em to hell.
Trying to be sensible, can’t do it. Fuck ’em all.

CL July 25, 2013 at 11:55 am

“Trying to be sensible, can’t do it. ”

Really did not need to type this. It was already apparent.

As to reading the facts I posted about lawyers before, I would suggest that if you cannot handle it, don’t read it.

Frank Pytel July 25, 2013 at 12:00 pm

NO FACTS IN YOUR STATEMENT. NO TIME TO BE SENSIBLE AND REPLY POLITELY. APPARENTLY UNLIKE YOU, I HAVE A REAL JOB. NO TIME TO TURN OFF CAPS

CL July 25, 2013 at 12:21 pm

Facts: (1) we have a Constitution, (2) it was drafted by a body consisting primarily of lawyers, (3) there is an axiom in the law about bad cases making bad law (whether it is accurate is open to debate, but its cliche status is not).

LOL on you responding politely. A key ingredient of many of your comments are expletives. I find it does not take much effort to be civil. Really just a matter of character.

Frank Pytel July 25, 2013 at 12:30 pm

NONE OF YOUR FACTS HAVE TO DO WITH THE ARTICLE

OR MY COMMENT. TYPICAL LAWYER

CL July 25, 2013 at 3:06 pm

You claimed lawyers should not be involved in the law. The Constitution is the highest law in the land. I also happen to think it is pretty awesome. The fact that lawyers gave us this awesome legal document is thus relevant to your assertion in that it shows how silly it is. I suppose you may disagree with me on whether the Constitution is great, but even then the fact is still relevant. If you think the Constitution is bad and it was crafted by lawyers, you could cite it as evidence for the terribleness of lawyers.

? July 25, 2013 at 4:20 pm

lol…I like to the refer to the Constitution as being a “good college try”.

:)

That being said, any document(or “contract”) written for a process like “governing” will be corrupted over time…PERIOD.

Jefferson inherently knew this, hence the “tree of liberty” statement.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:39 am

Oh shit. He got college in there again

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:50 am

CL;

Lawyers absolutely contributed to, but did not give us the Constitution of These United States of America. I agree with you that it is a wholly unique document in history that (should) provide freedoms to humans unlike nearly all other societies. I’m no Greek historian but I have no reason to doubt that they were pretty good at it too.

I would not cite the crafting of the Constitution by lawyers as evidence of their evil intents any more than I would state Christians are evil? How about Carpenters, Inventors, Farmers, Theologians. As an attorney surely you can add more to your arguments than this poorly stated and intuitively self defensive argument?

My claim that lawyers should not be involved probably should have read more like ‘…extremely limited to the point of near non existence as lawyers, excepting that they are citizens of These United States of America and therefore may not be excluded in whole, but do to their training in the arts of deception must be excluded to the extent that their input should be accepted only to the extent that it provides no harm to the populace or environment as a whole while excluding their ability to use any dictionary, encyclopedia or other reference material during the time that they are expressing their opinions or for a period of not less than 48 hours prior to said input being expressed. Excluding Sunday’s from 5 am to 9 pm at which time they may not do the aforementioned excepting their inclusion shall be allowed if they are not drunk off their MF ass. Amen.’

Better?

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:59 am

I would also like to point out that Oshitforbrains is an Attorney. Look what he is doing to the Constitution of These United States of America.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:38 am

Thank you ?. It’s always nice to see you pointing out things that I frequently miss, though I didn’t this time. But I do appreciate it. We should grab a beer.

CL. We are not speaking of the constitution or who drafted it. Nor are we speaking of axioms. We are speaking of the ability to perform a duty based on gubmint standards. You have diverged significantly. You are undoubtedly a lawyer, or know one.

As to your divergence, that is the key to my statements. They are unable to stay on point when it is important to others. They live and breath twisting the conversation around to their desires. This is not a few. It is commonplace and undesirable.

To address your remarks regarding profanity, tough shit.

? July 26, 2013 at 11:55 am

I’d always welcome having a beer with you.

Unfortunately, I’ve made lots of ‘friends’ here and wouldn’t want to put anyone(like you) in the position of having to defend my anonymity.

The country grows less free every day and I have to stay anonymous until I don’t any more if ya know what I mean.

I have no doubt Big Brother knows who I am…but I don’t need to add random stalkers I don’t know to the list of those that already despise me.

I’m not even sure Will knows, but he could find out fairly easily if he wanted.

:)

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 12:04 pm

Eh. I don’t care who knows me. To damn old to give a crap. HAGD!!

? July 26, 2013 at 12:19 pm

I understand completely. Give me about 10-15 yrs and I’ll be in the same spot and speak out under my name.

I’ve got a small business and young kids to care for(and employees), so my life is not really mine right now.

Even though I flushed my gov’t work down the drain when my conscience finally got the best of me, I still have clientele susceptible to being smashed (or even smashing me) if someone wanted to retaliate against me for my words…or someone decide a gov’t agency needs to pay me/my business a “visit”.

People might think I’m paranoid, which I can understand. I also think that somewhat powerful people are chomping at the bit to hurt Sic Willie in a bad way….I hope he makes it out OK in the end….because he is trying to do the right thing even if not successful all the time.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 12:33 pm

I hear ya brother

BenzeneAndBranchwater July 27, 2013 at 10:07 am

You are wise to be cautious.
For example, DHEC’s underground tank program has ‘gone after’ some contractors they don’t like and covered up at least some unethical or illegal activity by contractors they do like. This was all before Templeton, so she is in no way to blame here.

Some unethical if not illegal activity still could have and should have been used in a complaint to the licensing board over the contractor’s profession, if perhaps not to a prosecutor, but DHEC conveniently overlooked that.

Get a job! July 25, 2013 at 2:26 pm

“I HAVE A REAL JOB”
Hahaha, suuuuure you do.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:33 am

I’ll bet Jackie Chiles is a lawyer :)

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:29 am

CL;

My apologies for comments that you obviously took as being short, rude and unabashedly stupid. Some of us don’t get to play on the internet all day.

idiotwind’s post referred to simply being able to pass the bar exam for admittance into ‘the club’. I agree. If you have the knowledge to pass an exam for a professional license (which I oppose in most cases as being a non core function of gubmint. Think Barber, Cemetery, Cosmetologist, Funeral Board, Landscape Architect, Realtor, Time Share Registrant {That’s Real?!?}, need I say more?), then you get the license. Simple

Case in point, my case specifically in fact. I have been in the construction industry for all of my adult working career. 25 years in residential construction. There is nothing that I don’t know about the construction of a house. The only reason that I am ineligible for a Residential Contractors permit from LLR is that I do not have a current or former licensed Residential Contractor signing the application for me. The only thing that person would have to do is state I worked for them for a 1 year period of time and something to do with upright, upstanding, forthright, etc. (think Mungo). That’s not an agency designed to protect the interest of the populace. That’s a profiteering protectionist agency designed to keep those with the money, making money.

Most all licensing done by the state requires that stipulation. Someone else has to say you can do it. Well WTF are schools and code books for?

That said I would agree that there are a few licensing requirements I would like to see for the short term. I would only ask this as a part of the licensing being done away with all together. People have been dumbed down to the point that if the gubmint doesn’t say it, it must be BS. How this continues I’ll never know because most people, and I mean the vast majority, will tell you when asked about gubmint proficiency generally is that gubmint workers are morons, clueless and out of touch with what the people’s needs are.

As to lawyers generally, I think they bring a whole new level of scum to the pond. In my 50 some years it is my experience, with every single lawyer I have had the displeasure to speak with, is that they are lying, conniving shits incapable of understanding anything outside of their own minds. Coupled with a judicial system, redesigned over the centuries primarily by lawyers, that is corrupt to the core by greed and self-aggrandizement for the sole purpose of keeping their incomes and those of their cronies secure. That’s not to say that all lawyers are scum. I definitely believe though that it is not a few lawyers that ruin it for all, but the vast majority. Maybe seeing a new commercial, every week, on TV for 15 or 20 different ambulance chasers has jaded me slightly. Well that said, you’re probably correct in your original assessment. It must be me.

Have a Great Day :). There won’t be many left with the jurisprudence we have in society today!!

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 8:44 am

Perhaps there is a reason a licensed contractor won’t vouch for you. Do LLR employees get paid on the basis of application turn downs?

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 8:48 am

Another lawyer??

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 10:13 am

No.

You're A Moron July 26, 2013 at 7:29 pm

“Bad lawyers interpretation of the law”….That’s what judges are for, you dolt.

CL July 26, 2013 at 8:37 pm

And of course judges are never lawyers and the advocates before the court never have anything to do with how the law is interpreted. Pro tip: don’t call someone a dolt while posting something so embarrassingly stupid. Learning how to properly use quotation marks would also be a good idea.

CNSYD July 25, 2013 at 10:08 am

So based on your “logic” the same should apply to doctors, etc., right?

Reply
Frank Pytel July 25, 2013 at 10:22 am

yes

Reply
CNSYD July 25, 2013 at 2:40 pm

Brilliant. What medical examination can test 8 years of schooling? What type examination are you proposing? Free response? Practical only? How long would the test be? How would the cut score be determined?

Reply
Common Sense July 25, 2013 at 2:54 pm

What Dr. goes to school for 8 years? Are you counting undergrad, or those rarer-than-rhodium-MD/PhDs? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_school#United_States

CNSYD July 25, 2013 at 4:57 pm

I counted 4 years of undergrad and 4 years of med school. It appeared to me that Pytel wanted to skip all that and have high school seniors take the med exam.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:53 am

No. I think they should do away with all gubmint exams for professional licenses.

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 8:36 am

What “government” constructs and and grades the medical exam? Same question for engineers and architects since you allege you are in the construction business.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 8:46 am

“What “government” constructs and and grades the medical exam?” WTF?
Thumbs down.

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 10:10 am

Since you can’t answer, you merely demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge. The vast majority of licensing exams are NOT developed by “government”. It is not unlike the SAT or the ACT. Colleges don’t develop those either. They just use the results to aid in licensing decisions.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 10:16 am

I would agree with that. Tests are designed by the protectionists. You are a major whiner. Get a life.

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 11:36 am

Yes, the SAT and the ACT are trying to protect several groups. One is the student. They are protected from wasting their time and money (and your tax dollars) on attending a college from which they have virtually zero chance of graduating. You (the public) are protected by knowing that the degree from accredited institutions means something.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 11:47 am

Yeah that will change very soon. Many folks will be pulling their kids out in favor of online classes. Free and work at your own pace. Colleges cost too much cash along with too much taxes.

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 1:20 pm

Be sure and roll out your on line degree and see what employer honors it.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:52 am

IDK what test can prove that. I don’t know what test can disprove it either.

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 8:40 am

Through testing and the application of psychometrics, an examination can be constructed and graded that can separate the sheep from the goats, i.e. those who are MINIMALLY competent and those who are not. No different than a test for a driver’s license. But then you probably don’t believe in those either.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 8:47 am

Sure don’t. Or mandatory insurance. Or Gubmint in any way shape or form. God said ‘You don’t need leaders. You have ME’

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 10:11 am

So I presume that when you are sick you don’t “depend” on doctors, hospitals, medicine, etc.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 10:16 am

Moron

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 11:37 am

am I the one who said all you need is God? I believe God helps those who help themselves.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 11:48 am

Yes GAWD. AS YOU SAY GAWD. YOU’RE RIGHT GAWD

Lord have mercy on me. You’re like my mother.

? July 25, 2013 at 4:18 pm

Lincoln was a country lawyer, so was Andrew Jackson.

I thought I’d just throw that in to stir the pot…lol

I’m now going to duck out of the way.

Reply
Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:53 am

Too late

Reply
idiotwind July 25, 2013 at 9:35 am

in california if you can pass the bar exam, you’re a lawyer. they don’t care where, or if you went to law school. that makes perfect sense to me. if you can pass the exam, you must possess the knowledge. it does not make sense that the SC bar awards gatekeeper status to a couple of schools. that is a very simple recipe for corruption.

Reply
CL July 25, 2013 at 10:04 am

You are just transferring the gatekeeper function exclusively to the bar examiners. I kind of like having several choke points to weed out the unqualified.

Reply
Frank Pytel July 25, 2013 at 10:23 am

Doctors yes, Lawyers no. To many lawyers involved with law. That’s why its so mucked up. No feeling to it. No intuition. That’s where law has its basis at. Is it wrong or is it illegal?

Reply
CL July 25, 2013 at 10:44 am

The Constitution was drafted by a body that was 2/3 lawyers. It is not that too many lawyers are “involved with law,” it is that too many bad lawyers are involved with the interpretation of the law. And intuition and feelings (or Obama’s risible “empathy” standard) are a terrible basis for making legal determinations. There is an axiom that hard cases make bad law.

Reply
Frank Pytel July 25, 2013 at 10:50 am

BS I’ve read that lawyer crap from you before. Frack You lawyer lover. Fuck all the lawyers. Kill ’em all. Let God send ’em to hell.
Trying to be sensible, can’t do it. Fuck ’em all.

CL July 25, 2013 at 11:55 am

“Trying to be sensible, can’t do it. ”

Really did not need to type this. It was already apparent.

As to reading the facts I posted about lawyers before, I would suggest that if you cannot handle it, don’t read it.

Frank Pytel July 25, 2013 at 12:00 pm

NO FACTS IN YOUR STATEMENT. NO TIME TO BE SENSIBLE AND REPLY POLITELY. APPARENTLY UNLIKE YOU, I HAVE A REAL JOB. NO TIME TO TURN OFF CAPS

CL July 25, 2013 at 12:21 pm

Facts: (1) we have a Constitution, (2) it was drafted by a body consisting primarily of lawyers, (3) there is an axiom in the law about bad cases making bad law (whether it is accurate is open to debate, but its cliche status is not).

LOL on you responding politely. A key ingredient of many of your comments are expletives. I find it does not take much effort to be civil. Really just a matter of character.

Frank Pytel July 25, 2013 at 12:30 pm

NONE OF YOUR FACTS HAVE TO DO WITH THE ARTICLE

OR MY COMMENT. TYPICAL LAWYER

CL July 25, 2013 at 3:06 pm

You claimed lawyers should not be involved in the law. The Constitution is the highest law in the land. I also happen to think it is pretty awesome. The fact that lawyers gave us this awesome legal document is thus relevant to your assertion in that it shows how silly it is. I suppose you may disagree with me on whether the Constitution is great, but even then the fact is still relevant. If you think the Constitution is bad and it was crafted by lawyers, you could cite it as evidence for the terribleness of lawyers.

? July 25, 2013 at 4:20 pm

lol…I like to the refer to the Constitution as being a “good college try”.

:)

That being said, any document(or “contract”) written for a process like “governing” will be corrupted over time…PERIOD.

Jefferson inherently knew this, hence the “tree of liberty” statement.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:39 am

Oh shit. He got constitution in there again

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:50 am

CL;

Lawyers absolutely contributed to, but did not give us the Constitution of These United States of America. I agree with you that it is a wholly unique document in history that (should) provide freedoms to humans unlike nearly all other societies. I’m no Greek historian but I have no reason to doubt that they were pretty good at it too.

I would not cite the crafting of the Constitution by lawyers as evidence of their evil intents any more than I would state Christians are evil? How about Carpenters, Inventors, Farmers, Theologians. As an attorney surely you can add more to your arguments than this poorly stated and intuitively self defensive argument?

My claim that lawyers should not be involved probably should have read more like ‘…extremely limited to the point of near non existence as lawyers, excepting that they are citizens of These United States of America and therefore may not be excluded in whole, but do to their training in the arts of deception must be excluded to the extent that their input should be accepted only to the extent that it provides no harm to the populace or environment as a whole while excluding their ability to use any dictionary, encyclopedia or other reference material during the time that they are expressing their opinions or for a period of not less than 48 hours prior to said input being expressed. Excluding Sunday’s from 5 am to 9 pm at which time they may not do the aforementioned excepting their inclusion shall be allowed if they are not drunk off their MF ass. Amen.’

Better?

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:59 am

I would also like to point out that Oshitforbrains is an Attorney. Look what he is doing to the Constitution of These United States of America.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:38 am

Thank you ?. It’s always nice to see you pointing out things that I frequently miss, though I didn’t this time. But I do appreciate it. We should grab a beer.

CL. We are not speaking of the constitution or who drafted it. Nor are we speaking of axioms. We are speaking of the ability to perform a duty based on gubmint standards. You have diverged significantly. You are undoubtedly a lawyer, or know one.

As to your divergence, that is the key to my statements. They are unable to stay on point when it is important to others. They live and breath twisting the conversation around to their desires. This is not a few. It is commonplace and undesirable.

To address your remarks regarding profanity, tough shit.

? July 26, 2013 at 11:55 am

I’d always welcome having a beer with you.

Unfortunately, I’ve made lots of ‘friends’ here and wouldn’t want to put anyone(like you) in the position of having to defend my anonymity.

The country grows less free every day and I have to stay anonymous until I don’t any more if ya know what I mean.

I have no doubt Big Brother knows who I am…but I don’t need to add random stalkers I don’t know to the list of those that already despise me.

I’m not even sure Will knows, but he could find out fairly easily if he wanted.

:)

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 12:04 pm

Eh. I don’t care who knows me. To damn old to give a crap. HAGD!!

? July 26, 2013 at 12:19 pm

I understand completely. Give me about 10-15 yrs and I’ll be in the same spot and speak out under my name.

I’ve got a small business and young kids to care for(and employees), so my life is not really mine right now.

Even though I flushed my gov’t work down the drain when my conscience finally got the best of me, I still have clientele susceptible to being smashed (or even smashing me) if someone wanted to retaliate against me for my words…or someone decide a gov’t agency needs to pay me/my business a “visit”.

People might think I’m paranoid, which I can understand. I also think that somewhat powerful people are chomping at the bit to hurt Sic Willie in a bad way….I hope he makes it out OK in the end….because he is trying to do the right thing even if not successful all the time.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 12:33 pm

I hear ya brother

BenzeneAndBranchwater July 27, 2013 at 10:07 am

You are wise to be cautious.
For example, DHEC’s underground tank program has ‘gone after’ some contractors they don’t like and covered up at least some unethical or illegal activity by contractors they do like. This was all before Templeton, so she is in no way to blame here.

Some unethical if not illegal activity still could have and should have been used in a complaint to the licensing board over the contractor’s profession, if perhaps not to a prosecutor, but DHEC conveniently overlooked that.

Get a job! July 25, 2013 at 2:26 pm

“I HAVE A REAL JOB”
Hahaha, suuuuure you do.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:33 am

I’ll bet Jackie Chiles is a lawyer :)

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:29 am

CL;

My apologies for comments that you obviously took as being short, rude and unabashedly stupid. Some of us don’t get to play on the internet all day.

idiotwind’s post referred to simply being able to pass the bar exam for admittance into ‘the club’. I agree. If you have the knowledge to pass an exam for a professional license (which I oppose in most cases as being a non core function of gubmint. Think Barber, Cemetery, Cosmetologist, Funeral Board, Landscape Architect, Realtor, Time Share Registrant {That’s Real?!?}, need I say more?), then you get the license. Simple

Case in point, my case specifically in fact. I have been in the construction industry for all of my adult working career. 25 years in residential construction. There is nothing that I don’t know about the construction of a house. The only reason that I am ineligible for a Residential Contractors permit from LLR is that I do not have a current or former licensed Residential Contractor signing the application for me. The only thing that person would have to do is state I worked for them for a 1 year period of time and something to do with upright, upstanding, forthright, etc. (think Mungo). That’s not an agency designed to protect the interest of the populace. That’s a profiteering protectionist agency designed to keep those with the money, making money.

Most all licensing done by the state requires that stipulation. Someone else has to say you can do it. Well WTF are schools and code books for?

That said I would agree that there are a few licensing requirements I would like to see for the short term. I would only ask this as a part of the licensing being done away with all together. People have been dumbed down to the point that if the gubmint doesn’t say it, it must be BS. How this continues I’ll never know because most people, and I mean the vast majority, will tell you when asked about gubmint proficiency generally is that gubmint workers are morons, clueless and out of touch with what the people’s needs are.

As to lawyers generally, I think they bring a whole new level of scum to the pond. In my 50 some years it is my experience, with every single lawyer I have had the displeasure to speak with, is that they are lying, conniving shits incapable of understanding anything outside of their own minds. Coupled with a judicial system, redesigned over the centuries primarily by lawyers, that is corrupt to the core by greed and self-aggrandizement for the sole purpose of keeping their incomes and those of their cronies secure. That’s not to say that all lawyers are scum. I definitely believe though that it is not a few lawyers that ruin it for all, but the vast majority. Maybe seeing a new commercial, every week, on TV for 15 or 20 different ambulance chasers has jaded me slightly. Well that said, you’re probably correct in your original assessment. It must be me.

Have a Great Day :). There won’t be many left with the jurisprudence we have in society today!!

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 8:44 am

Perhaps there is a reason a licensed contractor won’t vouch for you. Do LLR employees get paid on the basis of application turn downs?

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 8:48 am

Another lawyer??

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 10:13 am

No.

You're A Moron July 26, 2013 at 7:29 pm

“Bad lawyers interpretation of the law”….That’s what judges are for, you dolt.

CL July 26, 2013 at 8:37 pm

And of course judges are never lawyers and the advocates before the court never have anything to do with how the law is interpreted. Pro tip: don’t call someone a dolt while posting something so embarrassingly stupid. Learning how to properly use quotation marks would also be a good idea.

CNSYD July 25, 2013 at 10:08 am

So based on your “logic” the same should apply to doctors, etc., right?

Reply
Frank Pytel July 25, 2013 at 10:22 am

yes

Reply
CNSYD July 25, 2013 at 2:40 pm

Brilliant. What medical examination can test 8 years of schooling? What type examination are you proposing? Free response? Practical only? How long would the test be? How would the cut score be determined?

Reply
Common Sense July 25, 2013 at 2:54 pm

What Dr. goes to school for 8 years? Are you counting undergrad, or those rarer-than-rhodium-MD/PhDs? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_school#United_States

CNSYD July 25, 2013 at 4:57 pm

I counted 4 years of undergrad and 4 years of med school. It appeared to me that Pytel wanted to skip all that and have high school seniors take the med exam.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:53 am

No. I think they should do away with all gubmint exams for professional licenses.

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 8:36 am

What “government” constructs and and grades the medical exam? Same question for engineers and architects since you allege you are in the construction business.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 8:46 am

“What “government” constructs and and grades the medical exam?” WTF?
Thumbs down.

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 10:10 am

Since you can’t answer, you merely demonstrate your complete lack of knowledge. The vast majority of licensing exams are NOT developed by “government”. It is not unlike the SAT or the ACT. Colleges don’t develop those either. They just use the results to aid in licensing decisions.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 10:16 am

I would agree with that. Tests are designed by the protectionists. You are a major whiner. Get a life.

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 11:36 am

Yes, the SAT and the ACT are trying to protect several groups. One is the student. They are protected from wasting their time and money (and your tax dollars) on attending a college from which they have virtually zero chance of graduating. You (the public) are protected by knowing that the degree from accredited institutions means something.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 11:47 am

Yeah that will change very soon. Many folks will be pulling their kids out in favor of online classes. Free and work at your own pace. Colleges cost too much cash along with too much taxes.

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 1:20 pm

Be sure and roll out your on line degree and see what employer honors it.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:52 am

IDK what test can prove that. I don’t know what test can disprove it either.

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 8:40 am

Through testing and the application of psychometrics, an examination can be constructed and graded that can separate the sheep from the goats, i.e. those who are MINIMALLY competent and those who are not. No different than a test for a driver’s license. But then you probably don’t believe in those either.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 8:47 am

Sure don’t. Or mandatory insurance. Or Gubmint in any way shape or form. God said ‘You don’t need leaders. You have ME’

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 10:11 am

So I presume that when you are sick you don’t “depend” on doctors, hospitals, medicine, etc.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 10:16 am

Moron

CNSYD July 26, 2013 at 11:37 am

am I the one who said all you need is God? I believe God helps those who help themselves.

Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 11:48 am

Yes GAWD. AS YOU SAY GAWD. YOU’RE RIGHT GAWD

Lord have mercy on me. You’re like my mother.

? July 25, 2013 at 4:18 pm

Lincoln was a country lawyer, so was Andrew Jackson.

I thought I’d just throw that in to stir the pot…lol

I’m now going to duck out of the way.

Reply
Frank Pytel July 26, 2013 at 5:53 am

Too late

Reply
Duh July 25, 2013 at 9:50 am

“S.C. Supreme Court tossed an entire section of the bar exam in an effort to artificially inflate passage rates at the school.”

That’s not why the court did it. No, the court threw out the probate section so a couple of kids of connected people would be admitted.

Reply
Legal Bagel July 25, 2013 at 10:04 am

List of 20:

1. Samantha Sarratt Adair
2. Rachael Anne Akers
3. Evelyn Belicia Ayers
4. Elizabeth Anne Baker
5. Shaheena Ramona Bennett
6. Kendall Renee Burch
7. Sherod Hampton Eadon III
8. Kristen B. Fehsenfeld
9. Matthew Cline Halverstadt
10. Samia H. Hanafi
11. Catherine Salley Harrison
12. Ittris J. Jenkins
13. Renee Sara Kart
14. Cooper Clanton Lynn
15. Rosalind Latrice Sellers
16. Stephen Fulton Shaw
17. Fred Brian Spivey
18. David Edward Wells
19. Warren Westbrook Wills
20. Courtney Dione Wingate

Reply
Atticus July 25, 2013 at 11:47 am

current job / law school

1. Inactive / CSOL
2. Social Security Administration / CSOL
3. SCDEW / Thurgood Marshall SOL
4. Inactive / Univ of DC
5. sole practitioner / Western New England
6. Asst. Solicitor / CSOL (child of circuit court judge)
7. Harris & Graves / USC (dad is longtime practitioner in Cola)
8. Pierce, Herns, Sloan & Wilson / CSOL
9. small firm / CSOL
10. Richardson Plowden & Robinson / CSOL
11. SC Court of Appeals / USC (dad was the chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee) wonder how she passed the Bar and got a job in the court system?
12.sole practitioner / Thurgood Marsall SOL
13. Inactive / Toledo
14. sole practitioner / CSOL
15.sole practitioner / NC Central
16. sole practitioner / Florida
17. sole practitioner / Tulsa
18. sole practitioner / Thomas Cooley
19. sole practitioner / CSOL
20. Inactive / Vandy

Reply
Walter Neff July 25, 2013 at 2:30 pm

“11. SC Court of Appeals / USC (dad was the chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee) wonder how she passed the Bar and got a job in the court system?”

I wonder if you wonder …

Reply
CNSYD July 25, 2013 at 2:43 pm

Based on your data, it appears only 8 of the 20 went to CSOL. Sic led us to believe that the whole thing was about CSOL. Now Sic Willie would speak with forked tongue would he?

Reply
Jackie Chiles July 25, 2013 at 3:16 pm

CSOL students made up 40% of the 20. No other school came close to that percentage.

Walter Neff July 25, 2013 at 3:52 pm

Yeah, but do you think the SC Supremes did what they did (ignored their own rules and changed the bar exam results) to help the CSOL, or to help the kids of a judge and an influential legislator?
I tend to think it’s the latter.

Duh July 25, 2013 at 9:50 am

“S.C. Supreme Court tossed an entire section of the bar exam in an effort to artificially inflate passage rates at the school.”

That’s not why the court did it. No, the court threw out the probate section so a couple of kids of connected people would be admitted.

Reply
Legal Bagel July 25, 2013 at 10:04 am

List of 20:

1. Samantha Sarratt Adair
2. Rachael Anne Akers
3. Evelyn Belicia Ayers
4. Elizabeth Anne Baker
5. Shaheena Ramona Bennett
6. Kendall Renee Burch
7. Sherod Hampton Eadon III
8. Kristen B. Fehsenfeld
9. Matthew Cline Halverstadt
10. Samia H. Hanafi
11. Catherine Salley Harrison
12. Ittris J. Jenkins
13. Renee Sara Kart
14. Cooper Clanton Lynn
15. Rosalind Latrice Sellers
16. Stephen Fulton Shaw
17. Fred Brian Spivey
18. David Edward Wells
19. Warren Westbrook Wills
20. Courtney Dione Wingate

Reply
Atticus July 25, 2013 at 11:47 am

current job / law school

1. Inactive / CSOL
2. Social Security Administration / CSOL
3. SCDEW / Thurgood Marshall SOL
4. Inactive / Univ of DC
5. sole practitioner / Western New England
6. Asst. Solicitor / CSOL (child of circuit court judge)
7. Harris & Graves / USC (dad is longtime practitioner in Cola)
8. Pierce, Herns, Sloan & Wilson / CSOL
9. small firm / CSOL
10. Richardson Plowden & Robinson / CSOL
11. SC Court of Appeals / USC (dad was the chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee) wonder how she passed the Bar and got a job in the court system?
12.sole practitioner / Thurgood Marsall SOL
13. Inactive / Toledo
14. sole practitioner / CSOL
15.sole practitioner / NC Central
16. sole practitioner / Florida
17. sole practitioner / Tulsa
18. sole practitioner / Thomas Cooley
19. sole practitioner / CSOL
20. Inactive / Vandy

Reply
Walter Neff July 25, 2013 at 2:30 pm

“11. SC Court of Appeals / USC (dad was the chairman of the powerful House Judiciary Committee) wonder how she passed the Bar and got a job in the court system?”

I wonder if you wonder …

Reply
CNSYD July 25, 2013 at 2:43 pm

Based on your data, it appears only 8 of the 20 went to CSOL. Sic led us to believe that the whole thing was about CSOL. Now Sic Willie would speak with forked tongue would he?

Reply
Jackie Chiles July 25, 2013 at 3:16 pm

CSOL students made up 40% of the 20. No other school came close to that percentage.

Walter Neff July 25, 2013 at 3:52 pm

Yeah, but do you think the SC Supremes did what they did (ignored their own rules and changed the bar exam results) to help the CSOL, or to help the kids of a judge and an influential legislator?
I tend to think it’s the latter.

lawzoo July 25, 2013 at 9:51 am

“Next” diploma mill?

It already is….that’s why it exists. Because of Student Loans ….POP !!!

Reply
lawzoo July 25, 2013 at 9:51 am

“Next” diploma mill?

It already is….that’s why it exists. Because of Student Loans ….POP !!!

Reply
carrie July 25, 2013 at 9:56 am

I was told years ago that there were three things that will guarantee law grads a job.

1. Have a parent or relative who has a law firm

2. Be in the top 5% of the graduating class

3..Have at least $25,000 to buy your way in

Wonder if that still holds true today.

Reply
William July 25, 2013 at 10:43 am

I had none of those things. I worked my ass off and made good grades at USC, but not top 5%. I have had a reasonably successful career thus far, I believe. I will agree that the first two things would have made life a lot easier. But the first one would apply to any business, not just the practice of law. The second one, appears to make total sense. It shows you are a bright person who worked hard in school. Why wouldn’t that make it easier to get a job?

The third reason does not make any sense to me. I know of no one who paid to get a job, and if you are talking about buying into an existing law partnership, I think you would generally need a lot more than $25,000.00. But hey if you have the bucks to buy part ownership of a business, and someone is willing to sell it to you, why shouldn’t you be able to do that? Isn’t that how the economy works. Besides buying into a business does not mean you don’t have to work or that you will be successful. You may lose your money.

Reply
Ken R July 25, 2013 at 10:52 am

You three things to become a successful lawyer imo – and you need all three. Don’t be stupid, work hard, and get lucky. I think that holds true today.

Reply
jjevans July 25, 2013 at 12:16 pm

4. Sleep their way in.

Reply
carrie July 25, 2013 at 9:56 am

I was told years ago that there were three things that will guarantee law grads a job.

1. Have a parent or relative who has a law firm

2. Be in the top 5% of the graduating class

3..Have at least $25,000 to buy your way in

Wonder if that still holds true today.

Reply
William July 25, 2013 at 10:43 am

I had none of those things. I worked my ass off and made good grades at USC, but not top 5%. I have had a reasonably successful career thus far, I believe. I will agree that the first two things would have made life a lot easier. But the first one would apply to any business, not just the practice of law. The second one, appears to make total sense. It shows you are a bright person who worked hard in school. Why wouldn’t that make it easier to get a job?

The third reason does not make any sense to me. I know of no one who paid to get a job, and if you are talking about buying into an existing law partnership, I think you would generally need a lot more than $25,000.00. But hey if you have the bucks to buy part ownership of a business, and someone is willing to sell it to you, why shouldn’t you be able to do that? Isn’t that how the economy works. Besides buying into a business does not mean you don’t have to work or that you will be successful. You may lose your money.

Reply
Ken R July 25, 2013 at 10:52 am

You three things to become a successful lawyer imo – and you need all three. Don’t be stupid, work hard, and get lucky. I think that holds true today.

Reply
jjevans July 25, 2013 at 12:16 pm

4. Sleep their way in.

Reply
CL July 25, 2013 at 10:11 am

I heard Alex Saunders give his spiel on why CSOL was necessary several times before it got going. He always focused on the supply, i.e. the number of applicants to USC who could not get in, but strangely never really addressed where the demand would be for all these new JDs (and this was before the legal market tanked). Its business model was always to target those that were not smart enough to get into USC (which is not Harvard) and lacked the savvy or drive to start a career in another field. You know what they say about a fool and his money.

Reply
CL July 25, 2013 at 10:11 am

I heard Alex Saunders give his spiel on why CSOL was necessary several times before it got going. He always focused on the supply, i.e. the number of applicants to USC who could not get in, but strangely never really addressed where the demand would be for all these new JDs (and this was before the legal market tanked). Its business model was always to target those that were not smart enough to get into USC (which is not Harvard) and lacked the savvy or drive to start a career in another field. You know what they say about a fool and his money.

Reply
Debbiedu neighbor July 25, 2013 at 10:50 am

Anything that has George Kosko involved is corrupt and inept. Poor George is the only federal magistrate to be fired in recent history. Why was he fired. Corrupt and inept.

Reply
Flynn July 25, 2013 at 11:13 am

He is a sorry SOB Racist, just look at his treatment of students there. The guy is not only insane (lusting over Abby Saunders) he is just fucking stupid.

(1) http://www.feministlawprofessors.com/2008/01/judge-who-helped-found-the-charleston-school-of-law-and-serves-on-its-board-of-advisors-even-though-it-is-for-profit-denied-new-term-due-to-sexist-and-racist-

(2) remarks/http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20080123/PC1602/301239964

Reply
Polyphemos July 25, 2013 at 12:50 pm

No. George just can’t keep his mouth shut. He thinks he’s being funny by saying outrageous things. He should know better in a town with such a huge race&gender-baiting industry.

Reply
Fatlock July 25, 2013 at 4:40 pm

Abby Saunders is a hot little monkey though.

Reply
Debbiedu neighbor July 25, 2013 at 10:50 am

Anything that has George Kosko involved is corrupt and inept. Poor George is the only federal magistrate to be fired in recent history. Why was he fired. Corrupt and inept.

Reply
Flynn July 25, 2013 at 11:13 am

He is a sorry SOB Racist, just look at his treatment of students there. The guy is not only insane (lusting over Abby Saunders) he is just fucking stupid.

(1) http://www.feministlawprofessors.com/2008/01/judge-who-helped-found-the-charleston-school-of-law-and-serves-on-its-board-of-advisors-even-though-it-is-for-profit-denied-new-term-due-to-sexist-and-racist-

(2) remarks/http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20080123/PC1602/301239964

Reply
Slartibartfast July 25, 2013 at 12:50 pm

No. George just can’t keep his mouth shut. He thinks he’s being funny by saying outrageous things. He should know better in a town with such a huge race&gender-baiting industry.

Alex is too sweet a guy to ever want to offend anybody. He’s a teddybear who belonged to the wrong political party. It’s the Carolina Curse all over again. Or should I say the WUSC curse.

Reply
Fatlock July 25, 2013 at 4:40 pm

Abby Saunders is a hot little monkey though.

Reply
scotty July 25, 2013 at 11:02 am

Wonder how much Alex and his pals will pocket for this scam?

Reply
scotty July 25, 2013 at 11:02 am

Wonder how much Alex and his pals will pocket for this scam?

Reply
Guest July 25, 2013 at 11:21 am

Heard AA (code Andy Abrams) talking they wanted this last year but let’s just say someone influential fought against it. That person is gone and let’s just say they dealt with it. Darla Walls tells me they’re preparing for a huge law suit. Ha! Shits nothing but a brick of garbage and poop kids with that debt. AA and comp should be ashamed.

Reply
Guest July 25, 2013 at 11:21 am

Heard AA (code Andy Abrams) talking they wanted this last year but let’s just say someone influential fought against it. That person is gone and let’s just say they dealt with it. Darla Walls tells me they’re preparing for a huge law suit. Ha! Shits nothing but a brick of garbage and poop kids with that debt. AA and comp should be ashamed.

Reply
Tradd Street Man July 25, 2013 at 11:32 am

Alex Sanders’ health is declining. Furman has the money (from the J.D. Hollingsworth estate) to buy the school without a flinch, but for some reason they can’t come to terms. There are a few who believe Toal is too involved in the whole mess. She and Sanders are way too tight for his own good. Time to buy some popcorn and a soft drink and watch and see what happens.

Reply
Jackie Chiles July 25, 2013 at 3:17 pm

It would make the most sense to have Furman or College of Charleston acquire the law school. It’s a shame it’s being sold to such a terrible buyer.

Reply
Andrew July 25, 2013 at 4:13 pm

CofC can’t buy it because CSOL’s is required by the state CHE to never receive state funds. Furman would be a great choice but they are in the middle of a transition already.

Reply
Scooter July 25, 2013 at 9:29 pm

Furman does not turn out crap.

Reply
Tradd Street Man July 25, 2013 at 11:32 am

Alex Sanders’ health is declining. Furman has the money (from the J.D. Hollingsworth estate) to buy the school without a flinch, but for some reason they can’t come to terms. There are a few who believe Toal is too involved in the whole mess. She and Sanders are way too tight for his own good. Time to buy some popcorn and a soft drink and watch and see what happens.

Reply
Jackie Chiles July 25, 2013 at 3:17 pm

It would make the most sense to have Furman or College of Charleston acquire the law school. It’s a shame it’s being sold to such a terrible buyer.

Reply
Andrew July 25, 2013 at 4:13 pm

CofC can’t buy it because CSOL’s is required by the state CHE to never receive state funds. Furman would be a great choice but they are in the middle of a transition already.

Reply
Scooter July 25, 2013 at 9:29 pm

Furman does not turn out crap.

Reply
Jackie Chiles July 25, 2013 at 12:43 pm

Selling CSOL to InfiniLaw will remove any modicum of decency CSOL ever had.

Reply
YallCalmDown July 25, 2013 at 2:26 pm

+1 On your username and avatar, sir.

Reply
Fatlock July 25, 2013 at 4:46 pm

So in other words, nothing is changing?

Reply
Jackie Chiles July 25, 2013 at 12:43 pm

Selling CSOL to InfiniLaw will remove any modicum of decency CSOL ever had.

Reply
YallCalmDown July 25, 2013 at 2:26 pm

+1 On your username and avatar, sir.

Reply
Fatlock July 25, 2013 at 4:46 pm

So in other words, nothing is changing?

Reply
Such A Shame July 25, 2013 at 4:40 pm

Does anyone know why Alex Sanders resigned from the board of the Charleston School of Law two days ago?

Reply
Grad July 26, 2013 at 10:28 am

Supposedly he was forced off the board because he didn’t agree with all this bullshit

Reply
They Kickem out July 26, 2013 at 3:30 pm

This was confirmed by the only student with prior knowledge of the merger but has since graduated:

Alexis Sanders got a vote of no confidence, paid, was forced out

Reply
Such A Shame July 25, 2013 at 4:40 pm

Does anyone know why Alex Sanders resigned from the board of the Charleston School of Law two days ago?

Reply
Grad July 26, 2013 at 10:28 am

Supposedly he was forced off the board because he didn’t agree with all this bullshit

Reply
They Kickem out July 26, 2013 at 3:30 pm

This was confirmed by the only student with prior knowledge of the merger but has since graduated:

Alexis Sanders got a vote of no confidence, paid, was forced out

Reply
Scooter July 25, 2013 at 9:24 pm

One day, we might get a top notch law school in this state.

Reply
afmajret July 26, 2013 at 10:52 pm

This state is too sorry to have a top notch anything

Reply
Scooter July 25, 2013 at 9:24 pm

One day, we might get a top notch law school in this state.

Reply
afmajret July 26, 2013 at 10:52 pm

This state is too sorry to have a top notch anything

Reply
LawTiger July 26, 2013 at 9:58 am

GT went there and he knows everything about the law.

Reply
Nurse Mildred Ratched July 26, 2013 at 6:05 pm

We have him with us at the Neuropsychiatric Institute
of Levitation and Competitive Persecution Traumas, and I am the law here.

Reply
LawTiger July 26, 2013 at 9:58 am

GT went there and he knows everything about the law.

Reply
Nurse Mildred Ratched July 26, 2013 at 6:05 pm

We have him with us at the Neuropsychiatric Institute
of Levitation and Competitive Persecution Traumas, and I am the law here.

Reply

Leave a Comment