Ex-Charlotte Law Students Get $2.7 Million Settlement, Despite Objectors
The approval Wednesday of the agreement between Charlotte School of Law and as many as 2,500 former students likely ends nearly two years of lawsuits over its 2017 closure. But a new suit targeting the hedge fund that owns it could bring more financial relief for angry former students.
January 17, 2019 at 03:00 PM
4 minute read
A federal judge approved a $2.65 million class action settlement between the now-closed Charlotte School of Law and former students, over the objections of some plaintiffs who said that amount is far too low.
Judge Graham Mullen of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina signed off on the settlement Jan. 16 following a two-day hearing, potentially ending two years of litigation over Charlotte School of Law's slow demise.
Current and former students in 2017 filed four federal and 90 state court suits alleging they were kept in the dark about the school's accreditation woes. The American Bar Association warned Charlotte of problems in 2014, but those shortcomings were not disclosed publicly until the fall of 2016, after which the U.S. Department of Education ended the school's federal loan eligibility, which eventually led to its closure in August of 2017.
Kyle Nutt, an attorney with Wilmington, North Carolina, firm Shipman & Wright who is representing 29 of the roughly 80 class objectors, said Wednesday that his clients are weighing a possible appeal. They argued in court that the parties hadn't provided enough evidence that the school's only significant financial asset is the $2.5 million remaining under an insurance policy, though Mullen disagreed. David Mills, an attorney with Cooley who represented the school and InfiLaw, did not respond to requests for comment.
Anthony Majestro, one of the plaintiff attorneys who helped reach the settlement, said it's the best students could hope for given the severely depleted resources of the Charlotte and its parent company, InfiLaw. Further litigation would only drain the remainder of the school's insurance and lead to an even smaller pay out to former students, Majestro said in an interview Thursday.
“We put on sworn testimony under oath from [the Charlotte School of Law] and InfiLaw, who testified under penalty of perjury about the lack of assets,” he said. “We very clearly established that this settlement gets all there is.”
Under the settlement, InfiLaw will contribute $150,000 to the settlement fund, alongside $2.5 million from insurance. Fifteen percent of the settlement will go toward attorney fees, Mullen ruled.
The class covers any students who attended Charlotte Law between September of 2013 and August 2017—or about 2,500 students, according to the initial settlement motion filed in September. The settlement would need to be $105 million just to refund the entire class for one year of tuition, the motion said. It's unclear how much each class member will receive. Payments will be determined by a number of factors, including how long claimants attended, whether they transferred, and whether they qualified to have their federal loans discharged through the Education Department.
Once key aspect of the settlement is that it preserves the rights of former Charlotte students to have their federal loans discharged through the Education Department's closed-school discharge program or its borrower defense of repayment program, which allows defrauded students to discharge their loans, Majestro said.
“It tugged at my heart to hear the stories of people who were objecting,” he said, noting that about 10 objectors spoke in court during the hearing. “As a lawyer who represents students and others who have been victims of fraud, it always bothers me when the person committing the alleged fraud doesn't have the money to make everyone whole.”
It's not necessarily the end of the line for former Charlotte students seeking financial redress. The approved settlement bars class members from further litigation against Charlotte Law and InfiLaw, but not InfiLaw's owners.
A second group of students recently filed suit in Illinois against Sterling Partners, the Chicago-based hedge fund that owns InfiLaw. The initial plaintiffs sought to include Sterling Partners as defendants, but the hedge fund was dismissed because of a lack of personal jurisdiction in North Carolina—a flaw the latest suit seeks to address by being filed in Illinois.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Better of the Split': District Judge Weighs Circuit Divide in Considering Who Pays Decades-Old Medical Bill
K&L Gates Files String of Suits Against Electronics Manufacturer's Competitors, Brightness Misrepresentations
3 minute readIll. Class Action Claims Cannabis Companies Sell Products with Excessive THC Content
4 minute readPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Reality TV Couple and Pacific Palisades Neighbors Sue City of Los Angeles Over Loss of Homes to Fire
- 2Colgate Faces Class Actions Over ‘Deceptive Marketing’ of Children’s Toothpaste
- 3Inside Track: AI Is Sure to Fray Big Law's Devotion to Billable Hour
- 4Evidence Explained: Prevailing Attorney Outlines Successful Defense in Inmate Death Case
- 5The Week in Data Jan. 24: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250