Quote:
Originally Posted by dirtbanker
Penn BFF- No mater how much they prepare, they still don't win all their cases. I am sure the Villages has competent legal representation, it was safer (less chance to incur expense) to close the school than to pursue a decision in court. It seems they dragged it out as long as they could (4 years) giving Schwarz an opportunity to reconsider his position, but the jackass would not, and thus they felt compelled to close the school to avoid the chance of a loss in court (precedence for future litigation?).
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
|
I'm a lawyer and have looked over the court decision on the motion for summary judgment.
Would somebody please explain to me how closing the LLC is going to end the lawsuit, as is often asserted in this thread. I just don't understand it. The LLC is not a defendant and does not even exist as a separate entity.
"The Villages Lifelong Learning College" is merely a fictitious name, registered to the Charter School, under which the Charter School conducts adult education classes. Ceasing to provide those classes will not stop the plaintiffs from claiming damages for the alleged past violations of the ADA. All it will do is prevent liability to the School for alleged FUTURE violations-- but the lawsuit against the Charter School will continue, unless the plaintiffs (and their attorneys) have a change of heart for some reason. That seems unlikely since they they are clearly after the money they hope to be awarded. But maybe the community outrage that is building over their lawsuit will cause at least some of the plaintiffs to rethink what they are doing and withdraw.
I will also be interested in seeing how it is possible that transferring adult ed to the VCCDD would avoid the same kind of risk of lawsuits under the ADA that confronted the Charter School. The decision to have the VCCDD run the risk will require a change of heart by the Developer, who, after all, really made the decision to shut down the LLC. Why would he feel differently if the VCCDD (which he controls) is running risk instead of the School that he also controls.
In this regard, realize that the December 2 Daily Sun headline stating that the lawsuit "forced" the closure is misleading. School systems throughout the country conduct adult ed classes despite the risk of ADA lawsuits. There is no real reason why the Charter School here could not also do so if so inclined. The closure was a result of a decision by the Developer. You can argue about whether or not it was justified under the circumstances.
In the end, the real solution to this kind of problem is to amend the ADA in order to stop this kind of lawsuit from even be brought. However, that is a long run solution. And, in the long run, we're all dead.