•  
  •  
 

Authors

Hannah Brown

Abstract

Finals season is a time of high stress in law schools. In fact, it is not uncommon for students to fantasize about miraculously convincing a court that a four-hour exam constitutes a form of intentional infliction of emotional distress. Such commentary remains firmly in comedic territory, not reality. Occasionally, however, law students with grievances beyond those expressed in the dramatic remarks above devote time and energy to seeking legal action against their respective law schools. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York encountered such a situation in Doe v. New York University, where a student alleged that the New York University Law Review’s commitment to diversity subjected him to unfair discrimination in the journal application process. Doe illustrates the confusion regarding what a commitment to diversity entails and the need for transparency in diversity initiatives.

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.