1

Novembei 4, 2u1S

!"# %&#"'

Bon. Robeit S. Caii
Chaileston School of Law
81 Naiy Stieet
Chaileston, SC 294uS

Bon. ueoige C. Kosko
Chaileston School of Law
81 Naiy Stieet
Chaileston, SC 294uS

!"# %&'()*& %'+,)- .* &/) 0'&'+) .1 &/) 2/3+4)5&.* %6/..4 .1 738


Beai }uuge Caii anu }uuge Kosko,

Please finu encloseu the iesults of a iecently completeu stuuent suivey, as well as a
summaiy of the suivey's methouology anu key finuings. The iesponses to the suivey,
completeu by ovei 6S% of the stuuent bouy, uemonstiate the high level of continueu
stuuent inteiest in the futuie of the Chaileston School of Law, anu the neai unanimity of oui
suppoit foi alteinatives to owneiship by InfiLaw. 9* 136&: ;<= .1 +)5>.*()*&5 .>>.5) 3
534) &. 9*1?738 3*( @A= .1 B7 +)5>.*()*&5 3+) 6.*5?()+?*C &+3*51)++?*C ?1 &/) 534)
C.)5 &/+.'C/D

Stuuents aie similaily uniteu in oui uesiie to be involveu in the uiscussions iegaiuing the
futuie of oui law school. To that enu, stuuents aie unueistanuably angiy that youi existing
agieements with InfiLaw (which you negotiateu anu signeu without consultation of the
Boaiu of Auvisois, faculty, alumni oi stuuent leaueis), have alloweu InfiLaw anu its
iepiesentatives to asseit contiolling authoiity ovei the uiscussions, anu that you appeai not
to have pusheu back against such an inteipietation. Cleaily, InfiLaw, as a newcomei to the
school anu the state, anu as an inteiesteu paity in any tiansaction, is not in a position to be
objective in its assessment of what is in the best inteiests of the school. Baiiing
youiInfiLaw's acquiescence to oui iepeateu iequests that the uiscussions be openeu to
incluue stuuent leaueis, we woulu join Ni. Westbiook's iequest foi the selection of a
meuiatoi, anu woulu fuithei ask that you keep stuuents infoimeu iegaiuing the status of
negotiations as they continue.


Sinceiely,


Leigh Ellen uiay

())#*+&%,)-

cc: Bi. Richaiu C. Sutton, Executive Biiectoi SC CBE
Ns. }ulie Caiiullo, SC CBE
2
Euwaiu }. Westbiook, Esq.
Bean Anuy Abiams, Esq.
Bon. P. Nichael Buffy
}ohn Robinson, Esq.
}. Baviu Bawkins, Esq.
Euwaiu N. Bughes, Esq.
Piof. Stephen A. Spitz
Kathiyn C. Benuei, Esq.
Ni. Baniel Coopei

1
!"#"$% '! #(% )(*$+%,#'- ,)(''+ '! +*./
,#"0%-# ,"$1%2
3
4
!"#$%&%'%()* ,") -./&./(0* 1/& 2"34"0"/#1#.5" 2"03%/0"0


5%#('0'+'62:

--0nline suivey accessible by unique web link (SuiveyNonkey).

--Suivey open appioximately 2 weeks (0ct. 21Nov. 2).

--Restiictions:
Passwoiu piotecteu
The suivey was only accessible on the Chaileston School of Law campus (IP
iestiictois weie useu).
The suivey coulu only be taken once fiom any computei oi uevice.
Responuents weie iequiieu to answei all suivey questions to complete the
suivey.

--Publicizing the suivey:
Posteu in class Facebook gioups
Posteu in uoogle Chat status messages
Infoimally emaileu within the stuuent bouy
Piomoteu via email by SBA Senatois anu heaus of stuuent oiganizations to
constituents anu oiganization membeis
veibal announcements maue befoie classes
0ne-on-one inteiactions

--Bemogiaphic metiics:
6S% stuuent bouy paiticipation
Even uistiibution of paiticipation acioss each class yeai












*
Foi questions iegaiuing the auministiation oi finuings of this suivey, please contact
legiaychailestonlaw.euu.
2
!"# %&'(&')*:

!"# of iesponuents $% '%( )*++%,( (-. )/0. of the Chaileston School of Law
to InfiLaw.

12# of 1L iesponuents anu 34# of 2L iesponuents inuicateu they 5%*0$
6%')7$., (,/')8.,,7'9 if the pioposeu sale to InfiLaw was finalizeu.

!:# of SL anu 4L iesponuents saiu a completeu sale to InfiLaw 5%*0$ /88.6(
(-.7, )*++%,( %8 (-. )6-%%0 /) /0*;'7.

!3# of iesponuents <.07.=. (-/( )(*$.'() )-%*0$ -/=. / =%76. 7'
$7)6*))7%') iegaiuing owneiship of the law school.

!!# of iesponuents )*++%,( >$ ?.)(<,%%@A) +,%+%)/0 that stuuent leaueis,
faculty, alumni, the Boaiu of Auvisois, anu otheis ought to uiscuss alteinative
possibilities foi owneiship.

!:# weie /5/,. (-/( (-. BC C%;;7))7%' %' D79-., >$*6/(7%' -/$ =%(.$
(% /00%5 (-. 0/5 )6-%%0 (% <.97' $7)6*))7%') 57(- (-. C%00.9. %8 C-/,0.)(%'
iegaiuing any inteiest it may have in puichasing the law school.
























"
!"#!"$"%&'&()" !"$#+%$"$
,
-

./01 234 546 768849: :;< 7=>< 4? :;< @;=9><7:4A $B;44> 4? C=D :4 (A?E>=DFG

I do not support selling the school to an institution who has a history of academic
standards and performance well below ours. I also do not want to be purchased
by a group whose focus is JD preferred, not JD required. I came to school to be
an attorney. If Infilaw is interested in purchasing a school, they should find one in
the same business as they are.
I personally was offered better scholarships by Infilaw schools, and declined and
went here to avoid the stigma and reputation, as well as the shady business
dealings of Infilaw. Selling to Infilaw goes directly against the spirit of the school
and our point of existence.
./H1 34 546 I<>E<J< :;=: 7:6K<A:7 7;46>K ;=J< = J4EB< EA KE7B677E4A7
9<L=9KEAL 4DA<97;E8 4? :;< >=D 7B;44>F

The cost of tuition alone is enough reason for the students to express their
opinion. The sale of the school has a profound effect upon each of our degrees
and the community.
I realize this is a for-profit and the founders can do what they wish, but at the
same time, we are their revenue stream. Lose us and you lose your revenue.
The school is supposed to exist to serve its students and alumni as well as the
legal community as a whole. Therefore, those that the school is supposed to
serve should have a voice in discussions regarding the school's ownership.
./M1 34 546 768849: 3E9<B:49 "K N<7:I944OP7 894847=> :;=: 7:6K<A: ><=K<97Q
?=B6>:5 R<RI<97Q =>6RAEQ R<RI<97 4? :;< S4=9K 4? 'KJE7497Q =AK 4:;<97
7;46>K KE7B677 =>:<9A=:EJ< 8477EIE>E:E<7 ?49 4DA<97;E8 4? :;< @;=9><7:4A
$B;44> 4? C=D F

We need to seriously consider any alternative options that are best for the
school, its students, faculty, and alumni, not what is best for two board members
with narrow, self-centered interests.
It is completely illogical that the Board of Advisors was not able to advise on the
proposed sale. That is embarrassing. All of these stakeholders (student leaders,
faculty members, alumni, BoA, etc) should discuss alternative possibilities for
ownership.
A school is a community. Without collaboration between all interested parties it
will never achieve its full potential.

#
$%&%'() *+'&%, -+%*./01* ())02%3 '%*4013%1.* .0 )%(&% 5066%1.* (7.%' .8%/' (1*2%'9
:;%4'%*%1.(./&% '%*401*%*< ('% /13/&/3+() '%*401*%* .8(. ('% '%4'%*%1.(./&% 07 ()) 5066%1.*
'%50'3%3 70' ( =/&%1 -+%*./019
"
!"#$ %&' )*+ ,-,&' ./,. ./' 0*+./ 1,&*234, 1*553663*4 *4 738/'& 9:+;,.3*4
/,6 <*.': .* ,22*- ./' 1/,&2'6.*4 0;/**2 *= >,- .* ?'834 :36;+663*46
-3./ ./' 1*22'8' *= 1/,&2'6.*4 &'8,&:348 34.'&'6. ./' 1*22'8' 5,) /,<'
34 @+&;/,6348 ./' 2,- 6;/**2A

I don't understand why Infilaw is talking to C of C FOR us.
I was especially excited to hear that we were allowed to talk to another institution
about the prospect of being purchased, especially one whose goals are more in
line with our school's.
This is an excellent opportunity and is one that the school must seize upon.
College of Charleston has already expressed an interest in purchasing the school
and has the pedigree to preserve and enhance its reputation.
!"B$ C= )*+ ,&' , D>E ,&' )*+ ;*463:'&348 .&,46='&&348 3= ./' @&*@*6': 6,2' .*
C4=3>,- 8*'6 ./&*+8/A

Definitely has made me very active in seeking transfer options.

I do not wish to have any educational affiliation with InfiLaw, especially any
affiliation which I did actively consent to (as I only only applied to Charleston and
received notice within a short time period before classes were to begin).
!"F$ C= )*+ ,&' , G>E ,&' )*+ ;*463:'&348 .&,46='&&348 3= ./' @&*@*6': 6,2' .*
C4=3>,- 8*'6 ./&*+8/A

I am considering transferring although most school will only transfer credits from
your 1L year and not my 2L year. Potentially wasting a year of tuition and a year
of time, but I am considering transferring because I do not want to attend a law
school owned by infilaw and would never put myself 200,000 in debt to attend a
infilaw school. I shouldn't be focusing on where I will transfer to or if this sale will
go through, studying the law should be my main focus.
It's too late for me to transfer away. If the sale were official before the 2L year I
think it is highly likely that I would have left CSOL.
!"H$ C= )*+ ,&' , I> *& J>E -322 , ;*5@2'.': 6,2' .* C4=3>,- ,==';. )*+&
6+@@*&. *= ./' 6;/**2 ,6 ,4 ,2+54,K,2+54+6A

Why would I give money to a school owned by an entity which is controlled by
venture capital? By its nature, the interests of an educational institution cannot
align with the interests of a venture capital group. I will never support a school
owned by Infilaw.
I will not want to be affiliated with InfiLaw. Everything I have read about InfiLaw in
the press is negative. While InfiLaw claims that these articles are not accurate, I
have yet to see anything outside of their own productions to be positive.
Therefore I can only assume that the quality of students will be diminished and I
do not want to be associated with that. I'm embarrassed that I already have to
"
answer questions about the situation in the first place. Charleston is not the place
for InfiLaw.
I will always support the faculty and students at Charleston Law, but I will never
support a school owned by Infilaw, financially or otherwise.
The Charleston School of Law I attended will be gone. I cannot punish the
students of this school by refusing to assist with Trial Advocacy or Moot Court
Competitions because I care about the students here and have their best
interests in mind.... unlike some parties involved.

















Future of the Charleston School of Law--Student Survey
1 / 9
99.17% 358
0.83% 3
Q1 Are you currentIy enroIIed as a student
at the CharIeston SchooI of Law? (If you
are NOT currentIy enroIIed, the system
shouId prevent you from responding to
this survey. If it does not, and you are not a
current student, PLEASE do not compIete
the survey. This survey is for current
students onIy.)
Answered: 361 Skipped: 0
TotaI 361
Yes
No
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
No
Future of the Charleston School of Law--Student Survey
2 / 9
35.18% 127
25.48% 92
33.80% 122
5.54% 20
Q2 Are you currentIy a 1L, 2L, 3L, or 4L?
Answered: 361 Skipped: 0
TotaI 361
1L
2L
3L
4L
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
1L
2L
3L
4L
Future of the Charleston School of Law--Student Survey
3 / 9
0.55% 2
95.57% 345
3.88% 14
Q3 Do you support the saIe of the
CharIeston SchooI of Law to InfiLaw?
Answered: 361 Skipped: 0
TotaI 361
Yes
No
Undecided
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
No
Undeci ded
Future of the Charleston School of Law--Student Survey
4 / 9
95.01% 343
3.05% 11
1.94% 7
Q4 Do you beIieve that students shouId
have a voice in discussions regarding
ownership of the Iaw schooI?
Answered: 361 Skipped: 0
TotaI 361
Yes
No
Undecided
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
No
Undeci ded
Future of the Charleston School of Law--Student Survey
5 / 9
98.89% 357
0.55% 2
0.55% 2
Q5 Do you support Director Ed
Westbrook's proposaI that student Ieaders,
facuIty members, aIumni, members of the
Board of Advisors, and others shouId
discuss aIternative possibiIities for
ownership of the CharIeston SchooI of
Law?
Answered: 361 Skipped: 0
TotaI 361
Yes
No
Undecided
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
No
Undeci ded
Future of the Charleston School of Law--Student Survey
6 / 9
94.46% 341
0.55% 2
4.99% 18
Q6 Are you aware that the South CaroIina
Commission on Higher Education has
voted to aIIow the CharIeston SchooI of
Law to begin discussions with the CoIIege
of CharIeston regarding interest the
CoIIege may have in purchasing the Iaw
schooI?
Answered: 361 Skipped: 0
TotaI 361
Yes
No
Not untiI I
answered
this survey...
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
No
Not unti l answered thi s survey questi on
Future of the Charleston School of Law--Student Survey
7 / 9
28.81% 104
2.77% 10
3.60% 13
64.82% 234
Q7 If you are a 1L, are you considering
transferring if the proposed saIe to InfiLaw
goes through?
Answered: 361 Skipped: 0
TotaI 361
Yes
No
Undecided
Not
AppIicabIe
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
No
Undeci ded
Not Appl i cabl e
Future of the Charleston School of Law--Student Survey
8 / 9
13.57% 49
6.09% 22
6.37% 23
73.96% 267
Q8 If you are a 2L, are you considering
transferring if the proposed saIe to InfiLaw
goes through?
Answered: 361 Skipped: 0
TotaI 361
Yes
No
Undecided
Not
AppIicabIe
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
No
Undeci ded
Not Appl i cabl e
Future of the Charleston School of Law--Student Survey
9 / 9
37.12% 134
2.22% 8
1.66% 6
59.28% 214
Q9 If you are a 3L or 4L, wiII a compIeted
saIe to InfiLaw affect your support of the
schooI as an aIumna/aIumnus?
Answered: 361 Skipped: 0
TotaI Respondents: 361
Yes
No
Undecided
Not
AppIicabIe
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
No
Undeci ded
Not Appl i cabl e
1
Novembei S, 2u1S

!"# %&#"'

Bon. Robeit S. Caii
Chaileston School of Law
81 Naiy Stieet
Chaileston, SC 294uS

Bon. ueoige C. Kosko
Chaileston School of Law
81 Naiy Stieet
Chaileston, SC 294uS


!"# !%&'()&% *( +*,-%)* +,./%0


Beai }uuge Caii anu }uuge Kosko,

Thank you foi youi lettei iesponuing to the stuuent suivey anu the summaiy of the
finuings. I can assuie theie is no mistake iegaiuing the numbeis iepoiteu in the summaiy
iegaiuing stuuents who aie consiueiing tiansfeiiing. Thank you foi the invitation to fuithei
exploie these numbeis with you.

If you will look at the questions closely, you will see that the two questions that inquiie
about a stuuent's uesiie to tiansfei aie pieceueu with the qualifying clause "If you aie a 1L"
(Question 7) oi "If you aie a 2L" (Question 8). Impoitantly, the numbeis of stuuents who
answeieu "Yes, No, oi 0nueciueu" to eithei Question 7 oi Question 8 coiielate neaily
exactly
1
with the total numbei of stuuents who inuicateu they weie 1Ls oi 2Ls, iespectively,
in Question 2, meaning that 0NLY 1Ls answeieu the question meant foi them, anu the same
holus tiue foi the 2Ls. The "Not Applicable" choice was pioviueu as an answei option foi
ceitain questions as the appiopiiate iesponse foi stuuents who weie ()* &%&+%,- ). */%
"0%(*"."%0 1'#-- on the paiticulai question, because the suivey iequiieu a iesponse to eveiy
question. To aiiive at the peicentages, I simply compaieu, foi example, the numbei of 1Ls
who answeieu "Yes" to Question 7 (1u4) to the total numbei of 1Ls who took the suivey
(127). I hope this claiifies things foi you.

In iesponse to youi suggestion that the iesponses to the tiansfei suivey questions aie
somehow not iepiesentative because the suivey uiu not pose a question asking whethei a
stuuent woulu consiuei tiansfeiiing %!%( ". InfiLaw uiu not pievail in its biu to own the
school, suiely you aie not suggesting that such a question woulu have biought the numbeis
%!%( 1')-% to oui school's 1L attiition iate in a typical yeai. Foi the last yeai foi which uata
is available, Chaileston School of Law iegisteieu a total 1L attiition iate of 1S.9% (S1

1
The 1L numbeis uo coiielate exactly (127 iesponuents inuicateu they weie 1Ls in Question 2, anu
127 iesponuents total answeieu "Yes, No, oi 0nueciueu" to Question 7). The 2L numbeis aie off by 2
(92 iesponuents inuicateu they weie 2Ls in Question 2, but 94 iesponuents answeieu "Yes, No, oi
0nueciueu" to Question 8). The iemaining iesponuents to these questions, those who answeieu "Not
Applicable," aie stuuents of class yeais othei than the class specifically iuentifieu in the question.
2
stuuents).
2
Even taking into account the uiffeience between 1Ls who !"#$%" to tiansfei anu
those who aie &'()&**+ &-*" (. !. #., the fact that 82% of 1L stuuents who took the suivey
aie cuiiently consiueiing tiansfeiiing is chilling. Even assuming, iathei geneiously, that
eveiy 1L stuuent who uiu not take the suivey is committeu to staying at Chaileston, those
1Ls who answeieu "Yes" to the tiansfei question #($** './#($()(" .0"% 112 .3 (4" (.(&* 56
'*&##.

Fuitheimoie, the fact that S2% of 2Ls who took the suivey aie consiueiing tiansfeiiing
(anu incuiiing substantial auuitional uebt in the piocess), while ZER0 2Ls tiansfeiieu in
the last yeai foi which numbeis aie available, makes it cleai that we aie not opeiating
unuei anything close to oui "noimal" attiition iates. Asking stuuents such a "what if"
question woulu not have been piouuctivestuuents aie making choices now, with the
infoimation they have available, anu by all accounts, aie inuicating that they uo not choose
an affiliation with an InfiLaw-owneu school.

Thank you again foi the invitation to uiscuss the suivey's methouology anu the ultimate
finuings. The suivey is highly ieflective of the "stuuent concein," as you teim it, which, as
you can see fiom the high tuinout anu neai unanimity of iesponses, is not abating as the
weeks anu months pass. Stuuents iemain committeu to the puisuit of alteinative owneiship
scenaiios, anu aie ueteimineu to holu those in powei accountable foi theii actions, which
affect all stuuents, oui investment in oui euucations, anu the futuie chaiactei of the
institution that we love so ueaily.


Sinceiely,


Leigh Ellen uiay

7((&'48"/(#

cc: Bi. Richaiu C. Sutton, Executive Biiectoi SC CBE
Ns. }ulie Caiiullo, SC CBE
Euwaiu }. Westbiook, Esq.
Bean Anuy Abiams, Esq.
Bon. P. Nichael Buffy
}ohn Robinson, Esq.
}. Baviu Bawkins, Esq.
Euwaiu N. Bughes, Esq.
Piof. Stephen A. Spitz
Kathiyn C. Benuei, Esq.
Ni. Baniel Coopei

2
Souice: http:officialguiue.lsac.oig