The documentary evidence attached to the petition establishes as a matter of law that petitioner failed to comply with respondent's rules that required him to apply for extensions of the ten-year period he had to complete the program, and that respondent's refusal to grant a retroactive extension was based on a negative evaluation of petitioner's academic performance that is effectively beyond judicial review (see, Matter of Susan M. v New York Law School, ...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
