Widener Dean Not Working in Hypotheticals Anymore; NY Bar President Living in Reality As Well

First, I can't believe I hadn't yet posted on this, but Widener professor Lawrence Connell, who, as I noted previously, got into trouble for what seemed to be a routine law school hypothetical, has now actually brought a lawsuit against the dean for her statements in the post-incident administration hearings.

Lawrence Connell contends that dean Linda Ammons falsely characterized him as racist and sexist in administrative proceedings when she sought to oust him from his job of 26 years after he used a hypothetical involving her murder, reports the Philadelphia Inquirer.

The complaint was filed last week in Sussex County Superior Court, in Delaware. Connell, who is white, and his lawyer, Thomas Neuberger, contend that Ammons, who is black, targeted him because of his conservative beliefs, according to the Associated Press.

I'm frankly surprised that this came back up, because usually when people threaten lawsuits, they're just blowing smoke out their butt, but this is interesting to say the least.

For what it's worth, Dean Linda Ammons spent five years as a television personality and worked in public relations for four years. I wonder if it ever crossed her mind that bringing formal proceedings against a long-tenured professor was the best step for Widener's reputation.

Also, after law school, it appears she went directly into administrative service (and after six months jumped into the governor's service - anyone could do that, right?) and never really worked as a lawyer. Not that I think that's a requirement, but aside from her administrative position with the state public defender, I don't see anything that actually requires bar passage.

Definitely a story to watch. In one corner, a long-tenured male conservative. In the other corner, a black female ladder-climbing administrator transplant from Ohio. Race, gender, politics, career trajectories - this is so scripted it seems like a law school hypothetical for teaching kids about libel or academic freedom, or maybe a final exam question.

In happier news, I encourage readers to check out this report from the New York State Bar Association president. It basically points out four areas (firm structure, training, work-life balance, and legal technology) and how those areas will change and it's spot-on on pretty much everything. Aside from a few dumb ideas (e.g. requiring public service), there's some good stuff in there:

The Task Force recommends that the State Bar Association examine potential licensing reforms, such as . . . sequential licensing, which would permit limited practice for new attorneys pending further training and examination; [and] adjusting an applicant's score on the bar exam to reflect the successful completion of skills courses. . . .

As the economy recovers, it is apparent to many observers that the legal profession will not return to business as usual. Competition for legal work will be intense. Law firms that do not understand and address these changes will have difficulty competing in the emerging marketplace.

Yup. Hopefully other state bar associations continue to catch on to the "new normal" and they can spearhead the changes necessary to meet tomorrow's demands of this "profession" before it loses all marks of an actual profession.

How to Hypothetically Lose Your Lucrative Job at Widener

For those lucky enough to be unfamiliar with law school hypotheticals, they're made-up fact patterns designed to aid the attempt at Socratic teaching. Often they involve deans and long-tenured faculty in a patently-ridiculous way that only long-tenured faculty and students whose sense of humor has been buried with their creativity and their sex lives find amusing.

But apparently a professor at Widener has taken things a bit too far.

The dean of Widener’s law school has been shot several times, but the wounds are only hypothetical.

Criminal law professor Lawrence Connell used the shooting scenario in classroom hypotheticals. Now his job is on the line after students complained that the scenarios were violent, racist and sexist, Delaware Online reports. The school’s dean, Linda Ammons, is a black woman.

Unfortunately, ABA Journal doesn't provide a transcript, so it's hard to judge. It's entirely possible that after 26 years of teaching, the guy just snapped and decided to passively-aggressively make his bitchy boss a murderer or drug dealer every day in class. It's also possible that the students are just whiny little maggots. I'd believe either and anything in between.

All I know is that in my own criminal law class, our elderly professors dealt drugs regularly. It's, I imagine, fairly standard fare. After all, you're paying places like Widener that 35k a year to teach law, not provide entirely-politically-correct entertainment. If you want that, jack the price to 45k-50k. My only curiosity is if they complained the professor first or if they went straight to the administration. I'm also wondering if it was just students bitter about their grade, since the class appears to be last semester's upper-level criminal investigation course.

But even if this guy is completely innocent and wasn't making overtly racist and sexist comments in class, I have to ridicule this response:

According to the [Delaware Online], “the controversial classroom imagery has left the associate professor fighting to keep his job of 26 years and alleging Widener violated his right to academic freedom.”

Academic freedom!?!? In using a private party's name in felonious conduct hypotheticals? Academic freedom is about research and letting scientists and intellectuals answer what questions they feel are worth asking. In no way does what name you use in a hypothetical affect what is being taught or how it is being taught. If you viewed this as an academic freedom, wouldn't professors would have a loophole against libel and slander? What would stop a professor from starting every class with "Female Dean X, who is a cheap crack-smoking, herpes-infested extortionist slut..." Although that's obviously excessive, there are scenarios where this type of conduct would clearly be slander (e.g., every hypothetical begins, "[Prof. x], who rumor has it bought his BMW with money he gained from cheating on his taxes...").

Talk about a sympathy killer. There's also an allegation that he's being purged for being conservative on a liberal faculty, which is the same excuse every Republican on faculty death row has used for 30 years. It also was the second time while reading the short article that I thought "this is the same type of bullshit that happens every month or so at some liberal arts college."

If any Widener students are out there reading, I'd love to know if you have specific examples (rather than bland, neutered summaries) of what the professor's hypotheticals were.