Topic: 4th Lawsuit filed in January
I've just read the 4th lawsuit filed on 1/6/10. Wow. I had heard that the laws governing PACT were substantially changed earlier this decade, but had never before been able to read the prior law. I seriously doubt that many of our legislators know what the prior law said, and I bet that until this lawsuit was filed Ivey et al did not know either.
Anyone who purchased a PACT contract prior to 5/9/01 should read this lawsuit.
Everyone who has any doubt that tuition was guaranteed by law should read this lawsuit.
Pay close attention to items 27-31 on pages 7-8.
Kudos to these attorneys for filing a lawsuit that is relevant, worthy of current consideration, and immediately enforceable by the courts. The courts can and should mandate tuition payment, and then the legislature can seek a funding solution without having people wearing green t-shirts always lurking around the corner, watching, and voting. I also encourage anyone reading this to forward a link to their representative.
Additional note - The plaintiff and attorney in this lawsuit is actually the same as w/ Lawsuit #1 filed last March but withdrawn soon thereafter. I suspect it was withdrawn as there was nothing actionable for a court to rule on in that lawsuit since all tuition has been paid. This lawsuit is very different as it cites the differences in interpretation of the law and how that currently impacts the decision to stay w/ PACT or to cancel that the board has forced on all of us to make right now. I suspect that these attorneys would not have re-filed this time w/out feeling strongly that this will be worthy of a court ruling as to whether tuition was guaranteed, at least with respect to the Class A plaintiffs.
Last edited by KBinHoover (02-11-2010 10:35:57 am)