law student suing school for giving her F

[yoMAMA]

washingtonpost.com
Court Lets Law Graduate Sue GMU Over F

By Jerry Markon
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 15, 2005; B01



When Carin Constantine flunked constitutional law after suffering a migraine during the final exam, she did what came naturally. She sued the professor. And the dean. And George Mason University.

"It's very ironic that I am suing my constitutional law professor for a violation of the Constitution," Constantine said yesterday. "How much crazier in life can you get than that?"

Constantine, 36, who has wanted to be a lawyer since junior high school, suffers from intractable migraine syndrome -- headaches so severe, she says, that they nearly blind her. She accused the university of refusing for months to let her retake the exam, then deliberately flunking her after she complained in an article she wrote for the law school newspaper.

Last year, a federal judge in Alexandria threw out Constantine's exercise in the real-life practice of law. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond decided in her favor Monday, saying Constantine met the requirements to sue under the Americans With Disabilities Act. The appeals court sent her case back to the district court for trial.

A three-judge panel did not rule on Constantine's claim but said that if indeed administrators had denied her a reexamination and a hearing, given her only three days' notice when they allowed her to retake the exam and determined her failing grade in advance, "such conduct would tend to chill a reasonable person's exercise of First Amendment rights." The court acknowledged it was viewing the lawsuit in the light "most favorable" to Constantine.

Constantine, who graduated from George Mason in 2003 with the F on her transcript, is studying to take the bar exam in Florida. She said the whole experience has been "a great lesson in how the system really works."

A spokeswoman for George Mason, Rey Banks, said the university is disappointed in the decision and is reviewing what to do. "We are at a very preliminary point in this process," said Banks, who would not comment further. George Mason is based in Fairfax; its law school is in Arlington.

The constitutional law professor Constantine sued, Nelson Lund, did not return a telephone call. Neither did Mark F. Grady, who resigned as George Mason law school dean in 2004.

In its 4th Circuit briefs, George Mason argued that Constantine was constitutionally barred from suing the university under the concept of "sovereign immunity" and that some of her "factual assertions . . . are erroneous."

"In taking this position, the University is not saying it should be allowed to engage in unconstitutional discrimination against the disabled with impunity," the briefs said.

Constantine's attorney, Michael J. Beattie, said the decision shows that "public universities are going to have to legally accommodate students with disabilities." Several organizations that support the disabled, along with the U.S. Department of Justice, intervened on Constantine's behalf.

"George Mason's argument was that Ms. Constantine was not qualified to be a law student because she was so severely disabled, so crippled. And that was just offensive," said Beattie, who is blind.

Constantine, a Georgia native who moved to Herndon in 2000, said she began having headaches in high school. By the time she started law school in 2000, she said, a neurologist had diagnosed chronic migraines.

She said the headaches are so disabling that they feel like "someone is sticking a knife in your eyes, like a bomb has gone off inside your head. You get double vision, you get dizzy, you get a halo effect, you get nauseous."

Constantine said that she alerted George Mason to her condition during her second year of law school and that other professors were supportive. But she said Lund gave her a problem from the start, threatening to lower her grade when she was not in class after being hospitalized.

After missing Lund's final exam in December 2002 because of migraines, Constantine was allowed to retake the test in January. About an hour into the exam, she recalled "everything got blurry."

After she flunked the exam, and therefore the course, Constantine pleaded her case with Lund, who said he would talk to the dean. After administrators ignored her calls and e-mails for months, she said, the university set a retest for June but suddenly moved up the date by a month and gave her no time to prepare. She flunked again, had to retake the class with a different professor and wound up getting a C.

Constantine said the 4th Circuit decision is "an amazing step forward for any disabled person who wants to seek a higher education." As for her dream of being a lawyer, she is more determined than ever. She said she might practice disability law.

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

[moJo]

After she flunked the exam, and therefore the course, Constantine pleaded her case with Lund, who said he would talk to the dean. After administrators ignored her calls and e-mails for months, she said, the university set a retest for June but suddenly moved up the date by a month and gave her no time to prepare. She flunked again, had to retake the class with a different professor and wound up getting a C.

wait, so they moved up her test date from June to May...but theoretically shouldn't she have been prepared for the exam since the previous December or January (when she was originally supposed to take the exam)?

[yoMAMA]

wait, so they moved up her test date from June to May...but theoretically shouldn't she have been prepared for the exam since the previous December or January (when she was originally supposed to take the exam)?

I guess she was gonna cram the 1 month to study for it......

[moJo]

I guess she was gonna cram the 1 month to study for it......
uhm i realize that. but she can't complain that she didn't have time to prepare.

anyhow, i do sympathize with her if she has a migraine syndrome and her prof was a total ass about it. too often, lots of disabilities, physical and mental, are not taken seriously.

but that one particular statement that i previously bolded really doesn't work for me.

[kimpossible]

I'd hate to be her client. You'd take a backseat to her headaches.

[yoMAMA]

I'd hate to be her client. You'd take a backseat to her headaches.

LOL.....

[TyroneK(prettypretty)]

You know, if she just laid down and accepted this decision, you'd all call her a bad lawyer. No one hires a lawyer to be mature and responsible about accepting one's limitations and living with undesirable results. People hire lawyers so they can avoid accepting whatever proverbial lemons life hands down to them. Sometimes the result is fair, but a lot of the times it's not.

I say more power to her and I'll bet serious money that she'll make a fantastic attorney if she's had the willpower to carry on her struggle this far. For most law students, peer pressure and the atmosphere of risk aversion and conformity in law school would have caused them to drop out or just hobble around with a grade that substantially limits their employability without protest.

[kimpossible]

You know, if she just laid down and accepted this decision, you'd all call her a bad lawyer.

As a client, and not a future lawyer because that's a complete world away, I want someone who gets the work done when it needs to get done and uses smarts to know when to use up the energy to fight something big.

It's going to boil down to which traits you feel would best represent you in a given situation. I would not feel confident being represented by her. I would not feel confident in her ability to perform based on how she handled this situation.

[deez nuts]

i wouldn't be retaining an attorney who graduated from george mason university in the first place if my ass was on the line.

if by some freak act of nature i did end up retaining one, 1)i wouldn't be retaining one that couldn't hack a constitutional law class which i assume to be one of those basic first year courses 2)wussed out on some final because of a migraine 3)has a history of incapacitating migraine headaches as to distract from what is the most important thing which is representing me.

[kimpossible]

In cases where ass isn't on the line, I'm more flexible. As long as the quality of work meets expectations and he/she seems consistently competent. My estate lawyer graduated from a state school. I wouldn't care if she was paralyzed, mute or deaf. If she were unpredictably unable to mentally process and practice law, that's another story.

I'm sure vic will read this later on and challenge my position, so I'll lay it out. You'll have to dumb it down to layman's terms, vic. You outclass me by far on matters like this.

As I understand it, this is what I'm asked to believe:

*Her condition is medical, unpredictable and uncontrollable by her and any solutions she has sought out by modern medicine or so-called alternative medicine.

*It affects her ability to process data, paperwork for undeterminable periods of time.

*This condition and this condition alone was responsible for her failure of Constitutional law. It is known that the failing grade was not a result of poor time management, lesser quality work, personal limits that all individuals have.

*This disability is so specific it affected her ability to pass constitutional law only and no other classes or finals. I should ignore that the university offered her a second retake that she was unprepared for and flunked again, ultimately earning a C the third time in the course.

*Two retakes are insufficient measures by a University who understood this to be a matter of opportune health and clarity for her, not knowledge, individual ability or lack of preparedness in regard to her understanding of the material in the course.

[lethal]

i wouldn't be retaining an attorney who graduated from george mason university in the first place if my ass was on the line.

GMU is ranked higher than the school I went to, FWIW.

I don't particularly buy the arguments presented by either side. They're both full of bs.

[yoMAMA]

i wouldn't be retaining an attorney who graduated from george mason university in the first place if my ass was on the line.

if by some freak act of nature i did end up retaining one, 1)i wouldn't be retaining one that couldn't hack a constitutional law class which i assume to be one of those basic first year courses 2)wussed out on some final because of a migraine 3)has a history of incapacitating migraine headaches as to distract from what is the most important thing which is representing me.

hahah.....



I don't particularly buy the arguments presented by either side. They're both full of bs.

yeah.

[TyroneK(prettypretty)]

I don't think the facts are as damining as you guys seem to think they are.

GMU has an odd schedule and Constitutional Law and other "basic" classes aren't available until the 2nd year of law school. All the events surrounding Constantine's failing grade occurred within little more than a semester. It's not like she got to laze around for a year and then had procrastination bite her in the ass.

According to the article, she got sick. She missed the exam because of her serious condition which had required hospitalization and for which she had been trying unsuccesfully for a long while to get an accomodation from this specific Con. Law professor. After being unable to make it because of her condition, she then got a promise from the school for a retaking date. Then, with little prior notice, they basically forced her to retake the exam in the middle of her second semester with all of her other required courses in full swing and occupying all of her time.

So instead of being mollycoddled here, she was expected to become some kind of superstudent despite her severe neurological condition. 3 days of learning and preparation is barely enough any law school exam when you've just taken a course, let alone when you have to reshuffle a lot of obligations in your schedule and you're suffering from a disability.

I feel like she has been acting like any lawyer would and should. Something shitty happens, so you apply to the authorities in charge for some kind of accomodation and tailor your requests to the best of your foresight. I don't think this woman could reasonably expect the school administrators to act they way GMU did. They're state-paid authority figures, not store clerks working on minimum wage. The expected standard of conduct should be and is higher. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if GMU violated their own internal regulations, let alone Federal law. It's not like they told her "Facilities are busy and you'll have to take it when we find the time." They gave her a set schedule. Then, they behaved in extremely bad faith and changed the conditions on her with extremely short notice. It was probably so they wouldn't have to stick around in June after the regularly scheduled tests were completed to receive and process the grade.

Even the best lawyer in the world wouldn't be able to represent you well if a court did that and gave your lawyer 3 days to find out everything about your case and get set for trial. Lawyers work on set dates and schedules that they bargain for and you will not encounter situations where the authorities act capriciously and force you to work contrary to a prior bargain. If you do, a good lawyer sues and that's what she's doing.

i wouldn't be retaining an attorney who graduated from george mason university in the first place if my ass was on the line.

GMU is actually a tier 1 school, which I think is part of the reason why this case is such big news. There are many lawyer farms out there which are less reputable.

And just to clear things up, just because Constitutional Law is taken early in one's law school schedule doesn't mean it's a basic class that's easy to pass. Because of the scope and complexity of the material, it's one of the hardest classes you'' ever take in law school.

And she did pass in the end, after all.

[yoMAMA]

And just to clear things up, just because Constitutional Law is taken early in one's law school schedule doesn't mean it's a basic class that's easy to pass. Because of the scope and complexity of the material, it's one of the hardest classes you'' ever take in law school.

And she did pass in the end, after all.

I heard civil procedure is the hardest class in law school.

do you guys agree?

[TyroneK(prettypretty)]

Civil procedure is the class that's most unique to law school out of your first year classes. Everything else seems at least vaguely familiar in terminology, purpose, and mindset. Depending on how your mind works, it can be very hard.

I do think that it's usually the worst taught class in law school, though.

[deez nuts]

i apologize if my statement ruffled any feathers. but, the reality is if your ass is on the line (emphasis on ass and on the line) you want the best representation you can get which usually means starting (emphasis on start and not the end all be all in your final decision) your search of lawyers graduates from the top law schools and flitering down.

it's just like how you would choose a physician for a serious medical condition.

maybe i'm wrong in this approach, but that's how i would start the search for representation (not counting references or recommendations) if i was being sued or facing possible prison time.

[yoMAMA]

Civil procedure is the class that's most unique to law school out of your first year classes. Everything else seems at least vaguely familiar in terminology, purpose, and mindset. Depending on how your mind works, it can be very hard.

I do think that it's usually the worst taught class in law school, though.

interesting.

thanks for the insight.

i apologize if my statement ruffled any feathers. but, the reality is if you're ass on the line (emphasis on ass and on the line) you want the best representation you can get which usually means starting (emphasis on start and not the end all be all in your final decision) your search of lawyers graduates from the top law schools and flitering down.

it's just like how you would choose a physician for a serious medical condition.

maybe i'm wrong in this approach, but that's how i would start the search for representation (not counting references or recommendations) if i was being sued or facing possible prison time.

although IMHO there's nothing wrong with your approach[I would probably too], I think the fact is most criminal lawyers are from lower tier law schools.

[TyroneK(prettypretty)]

i apologize if my statement ruffled any feathers. but, the reality is if your ass is on the line (emphasis on ass and on the line) you want the best representation you can get which usually means starting (emphasis on start and not the end all be all in your final decision) your search of lawyers graduates from the top law schools and flitering down.

it's just like how you would choose a physician for a serious medical condition.

maybe i'm wrong in this approach, but that's how i would start the search for representation (not counting references or recommendations) if i was being sued or facing possible prison time.

You have a good point, but depending on what your legal needs are and what kind of firm you're retaining for your case, you might be really lucky to get anyone of GMU Law calibre. The legal recruiting process isn't quite as formalized and rigid as something like the residency matching process.

[deez nuts]

I think the fact is most criminal lawyers are from lower tier law schools.

really? why is that?

You have a good point, but depending on what your legal needs are and what kind of firm you're retaining for your case, you might be really lucky to get anyone of GMU Law calibre. The legal recruiting process isn't quite as formalized and rigid as something like the residency matching process.

how am i supposed to go about building my shield of ultimate invulnerability of top tier law school educated lawyers?

[kimpossible]

really? why is that?


Same reason you don't work in a war torn area for a fraction of your true earning potential as an ivy league med. Threats to your safety is a reality and dealing with defendants in an adversarial manner rather than representing their interests.

You also have to square yourself with incarceration and potentially the death penalty.

As for the original topic, nothing new to add.

i apologize if my statement ruffled any feathers. but, the reality is if your ass is on the line (emphasis on ass and on the line) you want the best representation you can get which usually means starting (emphasis on start and not the end all be all in your final decision) your search of lawyers graduates from the top law schools and flitering down.

it's just like how you would choose a physician for a serious medical condition.

maybe i'm wrong in this approach, but that's how i would start the search for representation (not counting references or recommendations) if i was being sued or facing possible prison time.

It doesn't bother me. I'd probably do the same for criminal defense, though honestly I might pick someone who was a former hell of a prosecutor turned criminal defense regardless of what tier he or she graduated from.

[deez nuts]

when you say criminal law does that mean prosecution or defense or both?

i would think that the defense side defending the michael jacksons, the OJ's, the Gottis etc etc would make a fortune defending them. i mean you pay your dues and get experience like any other field and wait for your ship to come in. i mean that's a pretty big shape if you can land the likes of those guys.

as for the topic, why do i see constantine with IMS (intractable migraine syndrome) as a lawyer as the equivalent of a surgeon with the early stages of parkinsons? both aren't operating at full capacity and both might fuck up your life.

[yoMAMA]

really? why is that?



how am i supposed to go about building my shield of ultimate invulnerability of top tier law school educated lawyers?

like kim said, plus the fact is criminal lawyers are mostly in a feast/famine situation.

if you can land a top clinet like the juice or MJ, then you can probably make a hell of a $$$, and top criminal lawyers are filthy rich. for example the media says that the MJ legal team will get $5 million for their performance.

however most criminal lawyers aren't likely to find clinets as such, and defend mostly petty criminals...etc.

really? why is that?



how am i supposed to go about building my shield of ultimate invulnerability of top tier law school educated lawyers?

the shield is right here (http://www.cmrylaw.com/about/mesereau/index.php) :biggrin:

[deez nuts]

is there a possible ethical issue of constantine practicing law? i mean do you want the guy having a migraine attack and being temporarily incapacitated and distracted from researching your case all while possibly billing you for hours? or even worse do you want him having a migraine attack and incapacitated during a trial; say your trial?

[yoMAMA]

is there a possible ethical issue of constantine practicing law? i mean do you want the guy having a migraine attack and being temporarily incapacitated and distracted from researching your case all while possibly billing you for hours? or even worse do you want him having a migraine attack and incapacitated during a trial; say your trial?

well as long as she is capable of going her job, and not let her migraine affect her work, I would not having any problem paying bills to her as a client.

[kimpossible]

If she can pass the bar without suing anyone to retake it until she passes and get her other certs, I personally feel should be able to do whatever the hell she wants without facing any ethical dilemma.

But I also wouldn't want her as my criminal defense lawyer based on her actions and decisions, not only because she suffers from migraines that interfere with her ability to perform at certain times.

[deez nuts]

well as long as she is capable of going her job, and not let her migraine affect her work, I would not having any problem paying bills to her as a client.


if you were a client, what if say you lose? wouldn't constatine's medical condition be in the back of your mind as possibly having played a role in losing your case? personally, i would rather remove that variable at the get go when hiring a lawyer.

as for constatine, i would assume lawyers second guess themselves as to why they lose a case? will she second guess herself afterwards to her medical condition playing a role in losing her case. i mean i second guess myself all the time afterwards when a patient dies on the table like what if i could've done this instead of that? what if i did this first instead of doing it second? what if i was faster? could i have been calmer and in more control of the situation? did my hands twitch ever so slightly due to nervousness? it takes its toll psychologically, emotionally and mentally.

should constatine also reveal her condition to her clients prior to them retaining constatine as a lawyer? i would assume that the ethical thing would be to tell her clients beforehand of her condition and how it may at times distract her from their case

[lethal]

i would think that the defense side defending the michael jacksons, the OJ's, the Gottis etc etc would make a fortune defending them. i mean you pay your dues and get experience like any other field and wait for your ship to come in. i mean that's a pretty big shape if you can land the likes of those guys.

You'd be surprised where some of those guys went to school.

OJ's lawyers - Robert Shapiro - Loyola
Johnny Cochran - Loyola
Michael Jackson/Scott Peterson - Mark Garagos - Loyola

Loyola is ranked below where I went to school, BTW.

Its rare that a criminal defense attorney hits it big with cases like those. Most people go into criminal law practice for more philosophical reasons, both defense and prosecution. A lot of the best ones end up as judges.

Your typical Ivy League grad is crunching numbers doing legal paperwork for bond issuances or writing memos in support of a brief for defending a corporate client against some lawsuit. Others clerk for judges and then work for the Justice Dept., then go on to teach or become judges. They're lifetime academics.

You pay big money, you get bigger name firms, but that's no guarantee of the educational pedigree of attorney that's going to actually work on your case. Even the biggest, most reputable firms hire graduates from Harvard to Hofstra.

Oh, no offense to anything you said. If you prefer to hire a criminal defense lawyer who went to an Ivy league school, that's your choice. I'm not going to sit here and claim my credentials are better or anything. I would say that experience and professional success far outweigh whatever law school training a criminal defense attorney has, if you're making a choice.

[TyroneK(prettypretty)]

But I also wouldn't want her as my criminal defense lawyer based on her actions and decisions, not only because she suffers from migraines that interfere with her ability to perform at certain times.

See, I don't think her actions and decisions were that off for the reasons I explained before. Assuming that the article and her chronicle of events was accurate, I think she reacted as well as anybody with a seriously neurological condition could have reacted in the context of law school, expecially when the administration wasn't acting in a consistent way. Most people barely scrape by in law school without having to deal with that kind of disability and faculty intransigence.

should constatine also reveal her condition to her clients prior to them retaining constatine as a lawyer? i would assume that the ethical thing would be to tell her clients beforehand of her condition and how it may at times distract her from their case

I don't think there's a legal duty on her part to disclose this condition. Most of the time, I think it'd be a needless business hindrance. It'd be like telling your patient "Outside of the hospital, I tend to drink, overeat, smoke cigarettes, and refrain from exercise despite my family's genetic history of heart and lung problems." Theoretically, there's a worry that the doctor will have a heart attack while holding the scalpel, but I wouldn't say that it's the kind of thing that should always be disclosed. I would think other things like skill and record would be more accurate determinations of whether to retain someone either as a doctor or as an attorney.

Constantine's own disability isn't necessarily fatal to the practice of law, especially if she was a transactional lawyer, where deadlines aren't the end-all-and-be-all of their work. Arguably, these lawyers barely engage in traditional legal analysis and mostly do routine paperwork. Even if she was in litigation, the schedule of events in litigation is often so spread out and changeable that you can have a condition like this and still be a very good lawyer. The courts and often other lawyers will schedule around you if your condition is this painful and dehabilitating. Any normal size case falling outside the jurisdiction of a small claims court will almost always take a year or more to reach trial, let alone get resolved. Motion dates get adjourned for less valid reasons all the time.

And in the end, because the law is so nebulous and it's all about argument and context, you couldn't really say an adverse verdict was because of a certain thing happening. You can lose even if the law isn't on your side. Most cases aren't "slam dunks" and there are usually enough shades of gray, vagueness in case law, and elements of human falliability involved to make determining an outcome uncertain. For example, any insurance defense lawyer will tell you that you can have a perfectly legal technical defense but no jury in the world will actually stomach putting forth a verdict on an insurance company's side because people hate insurance companies. Even if you make an immaculate argument, if you don't get a case summarily decided in the motion practice stage, you're screwed. Come to think of it, the whole idea of a "winner" and "loser" in law is pretty inapplicable most of the time.

I'm not sure if the standard practice of medicine is really riddled with that kind of uncertainty as far as the successful execution of "basic" procedures go. I can see the practice of experimental medicine or newer procedures being similar though, but how much of medicine is the separation of conjoined twins as opposed to something more mundane like hemorrhoid removal or a colonoscopy? The idea of competency doesn't mean a lawyer wins a case the way it determines if a patient survives and gets the treatment he or she needs.

[kimpossible]

See, I don't think her actions and decisions were that off for the reasons I explained before.


Understood how you feel. I'm sure she'll have clients. I don't feel her values and judgment would appropriately represent me if I had a choice in representation. Doesn't bother me in the least that she'd represent others.

I imagine similar standards would be applied to me if I become an attorney and I would not be a good choice to represent some.

[applehead]

well i think it's admirable of her to pursue
her goals at that age, especially while suffering
from migraines.

my mom used to suffer from really bad migraines
for years and all she did for days was sit in a dark room.
she couldn't even get up to brush her teeth.