This appeal involves the propriety of the disclosures of post-graduate employment and salary
data by defendant New York Law School to prospective students during
the period August 11, 2005 to the present. Plaintiffs allege that the
disclosures cause them to enroll in school to obtain, at a very high
price, a law degree that proved less valuable in the market-place than
they were led to expect. We hold that defendant's disclosures, though
unquestionably incomplete, were not false or misleading. We thus affirm
the dismissal of the complaint. ...
Here, the challenged practice was consumer-oriented insofar as it was
part and parcel of defendant's efforts to sell its services as a law
school to prospective students. Nevertheless, although there is no question that the type of employment
information published by defendant (and other law schools) during the
relevant period likely left some consumers with an incomplete, if not
false, impression of the schools' job placement success, [the] Supreme Court
correctly held that this statistical gamesmanship, which the ABA has
since repudiated in its revised disclosure guidelines, does not give rise to a cognizable claim under GBL 349. First, with
respect to the employment data, defendant made no express
representations as to whether the work
was full-time or part-time. Second, with respect to the salary data,
defendant disclosed that the representations were based on small samples
of self-reporting graduates. While we are troubled by the
unquestionably less than candid and incomplete nature of defendant's
disclosures, a party does not violate GBL 349 by simply publishing
truthful information and allowing consumers to make their own
assumptions about the nature of the information. Accordingly, we find that defendant's disclosures were not materially deceptive or misleading. ...
We are not unsympathetic to plaintiffs' concerns. We recognize that students may be susceptible to misrepresentations by law school. As such, "[t]his Court does not necessarily agree [with Supreme Court] that [all] college graduates are particularly sophisticated in making career or business decisions" (MacDonald, 2012 WL 2994107, at *10). As a result, they sometimes make decisions to yoke themselves and their spouses and/or their children to a crushing burden because the schools have made misleading representations that give the impression that a full time job is easily obtainable when in fact it is not.
Given this reality, it is important to remember that the practice of law is a noble profession that takes pride in its high ethical standards. Indeed, in order to join and continue to enjoy the privilege of being an active member of the legal profession, every prospective and active member of the profession is called upon to demonstrate candor and honesty. This requirement is not a trivial one. For the profession to continue to ensure that its members remain candid and honest public servants, all segments of the profession must work in concert to instill the importance of those values. "In the last analysis, the law is what the lawyers are. And the law and the lawyers are what the law schools make them." Defendant and its peers owe prospective students more than just barebones compliance with their legal obligations. Defendant and its peers are educational not-for-profit institutions. They should be dedicated to advancing the public welfare. In that vein, defendant and its peers have at least an ethical obligation of absolute candor to their prospective students.