Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavy Chips
I'm a lawyer and have looked over the court decision on the motion for summary judgment.
I'm not a lawyer, but here is my $0.02
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.
I completely agree with this assertion.
"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 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.
Agreed, closing the LLC only stops the potential of future violations/issues. The courts will decide if there were past violations and if so, what the penalties are. Closing the LLC also gets public sentiment on your side "to try the case in the court of public opinion" and potentially influence the plaintiffs to drop the case
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.
My understanding is that the RLG's are exempt from the ADA and RA requirements (correct me if I'm wrong). So, all of the classes would/could be reorganized as RLG's.
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.
Again, just my speculation, but the closure was done primarily to get public outcry. You have already read that they are trying to create LLC 2.0
The curious thing to watch is if the school wins on all counts, will the LLC reopen in the same structure as before?
|
As regards your two cents, I think that you are spot on.
Regarding your suggestion that the classes might be re-organized and recharacterized as RLG's: That could've been tried under the auspices of the charter school if the developer had wanted to do so. However, the operation of the adult education program would require a degree of involvement by the VCCDD or charter school that might make it hard to sustain the argument that it is a genuine club.
Remember, also, that the plaintiffs have not given up on screwing over the clubs. Plaintiffs are appealing the summary judgment dismissal of their claims against the clubs.
Personally, I would like to see the developer have the charter school keep the LLC open, continue to fight the lawsuit, and enlist the help of business groups like the Chamber of Commerce as well as citizens groups like the POA and VHA to mount an effort to amend the ADA to prevent this kind of lawsuit in the future--and maybe amend the laws throughout the US so that, as in other countries, the loser in a lawsuit pays the winner's attorney fees. That last change would stop a whole bunch of frivolous lawsuits. Little chance of any of this happening.