In November 2010, a class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama in Birmingham, seeking recoveries on behalf of thousands of adults enrolled in prepaid distance education programs at Clayton College of Natural Health, Inc. The lawsuit comes in the wake of CCNH’s announcement in July 2010 that it was suddenly closing the school and its distance education programs after more than 20 years of operation.
The lawsuit alleges that at the time of the closing, CCNH had already collected tens of millions of dollars in tuition from Plaintiffs and a class of similarly situated persons for programs that CCNH summarily stopped providing. After the abrupt termination of its distance education programs, CCNH failed to refund tuition, according to the lawsuit.
Plaintiffs’ co-counsel in the lawsuit are Thomas H. Howlett and Dean M. Googasian of The Googasian Firm, P.C., who may be contacted by calling 1-877-540-8333, or by clicking here or sending an e-mail to ccnhlawsuit@googasian.com. Joining The Googasian Firm in pursuit of the lawsuit is Plaintiffs’counsel, the Birmingham, Alabama-based law firm, Whatley, Drake & Kallas, LLC.
Defendants in the lawsuit include CCNH and Magnolia Corporate Services, Inc., as well as four individuals, Lloyd Clayton, Jeff Goin, William Fishburne, and Kay Channell.
According to the lawsuit, CCNH marketed its programs as affording students the ability to learn and pursue degree and certificate programs with flexibility as to the time within which they were completed. In its 2008 catalog, CCNH stated that, “At CCNH, the self-paced programs are designed to fit your schedule, so that any part of the day becomes study time and assignments may be submitted at your convenience. In order to help you organize your studies and ‘stay on track,’ degree programs are divided into phases. Although you must complete the phases of your program sequentially, there is no requirement that you take every course in the order it appears in the phase. It is our expectation that you will complete all phases of each individual degree program within five years. At CCNH, you enroll, study, and progress on your schedule, not ours.” But the sudden closure of CCNH precludes these students from completing the distance education programs for which they had paid and devoted considerable time and effort, the lawsuit alleges.
If you have a concern about experiences with CCNH or Magnolia, click here to share these concerns.
The lawsuit asserts breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, and other claims, and seeks compensation for the tuition amounts paid for programs that are no longer available and for Plaintiffs’ loss of time and opportunity, among other damages. A copy of the lawsuit can be found by clicking here.
In accordance with Alabama State Bar requirements, no representation is made that the quality of legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers. ARPC 7.2 (e).
George Gollin (George D. Gollin, George Dana Gollin) has proven himself to be the kiss of death to another political career in Illinois.
Gollin coughed up another $500 (hey big spender!) for the campaign of his fellow physicist Bill Foster (IL-14), but for some reason the Marxist stench of Gollin's armpit-sniffing, nose-picking, butt-scratching endorsement wasn't enough to persuade Illinois voters.
Thanks to the democratic process, Illinois taxpayers can now say good riddance to at least one of the surplus physics douchebags who have been feeding far too long at the public trough.
"Harvard Eddie" Grant was a utility infielder for the then-New York Giants. He answered the call to serve his country, and became the first major leaguer to give his life in WWI. To honor his service and his sacrifice, in 1921 the Giants placed a monument in dead center field of their Polo Grounds home. The Giants won the World Series that season, and again the following one.
But when the team left New York for Than Franthithco after the 1957 season the plaque was stolen. (It was found many years later in the attic of a New Jersey home that once belonged to a cop.) Until tonight, the Giants had not won a World Series since it disappeared.
Quote:The mysterious disappearance of the plaque isn't what angered the baseball muses. But did they subsequently punish the Giants for their disinterest in locating the missing original plaque, or in authorizing a replacement?
Baseball historians think so. ...
Through the San Francisco years, the Giants were frequently approached by various groups about installing a makeup memorial, but were repeatedly rejected by an ownership that considered Grant part of the New York Giants' past. The last such spurned overture was made by the Great War Society in December 2001.
Ten months later, the Giants lost another World Series, to the Angels.
On Memorial Day 2006, Giants ownership finally gave in and mounted a replica plaque to Grant at AT&T Park, a club official at the time telling the author Bradley, "Baseball fans are so superstitious, and players are too, so you have to take this stuff seriously. And if by putting up a plaque we can break some sort of curse, who's to say it's not the right thing to do?"
...The replica is a faithful reproduction mounted near AT&T Park's Lefty O'Doul entrance. O'Doul was a career .349 hitter who won a pair of National League batting titles -- he nearly hit .400 in 1929, when he finished at .398. Meaning, he and Grant had nothing in common.
Grant may have been baseball's first renaissance man. He was Harvard-educated and grammatically-correct, known to get on teammates' nerves by yelling on pop flies, "I have it," rather than the traditional but ungrammatical, "I got it."
As a ballplayer, Grant was an accessory. In a 10-year career, he never hit higher than .277, had good speed but only moderate extra-base pop. He had his greatest success early in his career with the Athletics [sic, Phillies] and was really only a blip on the Giants' radar, playing 202 games for them in three seasons.
But he wore the hero's mantle well. He volunteered for the military in 1917, at 34 being well beyond draft age, and distinguished himself as a brave battlefield leader before falling.
So the N.Y. Giants were honoring the man, not the ballplayer, with that plaque. After many decades, the Giants recognized that Eddie Grant towered above the limitations of being "part of New York Giants history," and they did right.
Most likely, Braves manager Dave Bancroft and Giants interim manager Hughie Jennings
Original plaque in center field of the Polo Grounds
Plaque visible under the 483 sign, as Willie Mays makes "The Catch" in Game 1 of the 1954 series.
Eddie Grant with the Reds
Quote:From the memorial's dedication in 1921 until the Giants abandoned New York and the Polo Grounds in 1957, a solemn wreath-laying ceremony was held at the Grant monument every year, usually between games of the then customary Memorial Day doubleheader.
At the conclusion of the final game played at the Polo Grounds on September 29, 1957, souvenir hunters mobbed the field and the New York Times reported that three teenagers were seen prying the bronze plaque off the monument. Rumors that the police ultimately recovered the plaque were never verified, and its whereabouts remained a mystery for over forty years.
In late July 1999, the Eddie Grant Memorial plaque was discovered in the attic of a Ho-Ho-Kus, New Jersey home formerly owned by Lena and Gaetano Bucca. The new home owners, Brian and Deborah Lamb, had discovered the plaque carefully wrapped in a blanket and hidden under a trap door in the attic. Brian Lamb contacted Baseball Reliquary Board member, Wendy Brougalman, a former business associate, with news of the discovery.
At this point, Albert Kilchesty, the Reliquary's Archivist and Historian, became instrumental in negotiating the plaque's acquisition, and in attempting to solve some of the mysteries of the large item's disappearance. In his field notes of August 1999, Kilchesty writes, "The Lambs purchased the home from the Bucca family after the death of Lena Bucca in 1998. Gaetano Bucca, a former New York City police officer, died in 1974. Several calls to the NYPD Department of Records revealed that Gaetano Bucca, who retired from the force in January 1958 and subsequently moved with his family to New Jersey, served in the city's 32nd precinct, an area of jurisdiction encompassing the Coogan's Bluff/Polo Grounds vicinity.
"Additional police records note that subsequent to receiving a gunshot wound during a routine investigation of a domestic disturbance in 1955, Mr. Bucca was assigned to light foot patrols in and around the Polo Grounds. 'Light Foot Patrol' duty at that time meant just that, a foot receiving light duty near the environs of a bar stool. The Eddie Grant Memorial plaque disappeared after the final New York Giants game on September 29, 1957. It is assumed that the affable Mr. Bucca, with the aid of a few well-lubricated colleagues, had arranged to take the plaque with the intention of delivering it for safekeeping to the Eddie Grant American Legion Post 1225 in the Bronx. The plaque never made it there. How and why it ended up in Mr. Bucca's attic is totally baffling. Benjamin Bucca, Lena and Gaetano's only surviving son and a well-respected probate attorney, had no knowledge at all of the 100-pound plaque situated just above his head in his former bedroom. 'You know, I never felt comfortable in that bedroom. Now I know why! That thing could've fallen on my head in the middle of the night and flattened me. My Pop was always a bit of a mystery, but this . . . This is . . . What the hell was he thinking about?'"
(CNSNews.com) - Graduate students and former graduate students now form the last redoubt of approval for President Barack Obama, according to the Gallup poll.
When American adults are sorted by their level of educational attainment--including those with a high school diploma or less, those with some college, those with college degrees but no graduate school experience, and those who have attended at least some graduate school--only the last group still gives Obama a majority approval rating.
In Gallup polling for the week of Oct. 18-24, Americans who have done some postgraduate studies (whether or not they have actually earned a postgraduate degree), give Obama a 55-percent job approval rating.
Obama's approval is lowest among Americans who have a college degree but never attended grad school. Among this group, only 41 percent approve of the job the president is doing. The last time college-degree-only Americans gave Obama a majority approval rating, according to the Gallup poll, was the week of May 10-16.
Americans who have attended some college, but do not have a college degree, give Obama a 42-percent approval rating. The last time this group gave Obama a majority approval rating was the week of April 19-25.
Americans who have a high school diploma or less give Obama a 43 percent approval rating. The last time they gave Obama a majority approval rating was the week of Feb. 22-28.
During the course of Obama's presidency, there has been only one week--Aug. 16-22, 2010--when the president's job approval rating dipped below 50 percent among grad students and former grad students. That week, it hit 47 percent among this group. Aug. 16-22, 2010, and the following week of Aug. 23-29, was also the period when Obama hit his lowest overall weekly approval rating of 43 percent as measured by Gallup's polling.
For last week, Obama's overall approval rating was 44 percent in the Gallup poll, almost matching his all-time weekly low as tracked by Gallup.
However, for the three-day period of Oct. 21-23, Obama's approval rating was only 41 percent--the absolute lowest three-day rating of his presidency, according to Gallup. For the three days of Oct. 23-25--the latest period available--Obama's overall approval rating was 43 percent.
Gallup asks about 500 people per day whether they approve or disapprove of the job the president is doing.
In the week of Jan. 19-25, 2009 when President Obama was sworn into office, his overall approval rating in the Gallup poll was 67 percent and was near or above that rate among Americans of all educational attainment levels. In that week, those with high school diplomas or less gave Obama an approval rating of 66 percent, those with some college gave him an approval rating of 65 percent, those with college degrees but no graduate school gave him an approval rating of 69 percent, and those with some postgraduate experience gave him an approval rating of 70 percent.
No, it's not a rehash of any number of old threads. It's George Gollin (George D. Gollin, George Dana Gollin) getting caught in yet another lie.
Remember that little federal extortion and slander lawsuit against George Gollin, the one that was dismissed by the court on its own motion for lack of jurisdiction?
George Gollin falsely asserted that the plaintiffs were ordered to pay $58,000 in sanctions.
George Gollin Wrote:$58k
by g-gollin on Tue Aug 17, 2010 11:36 am
Just to put an endcap on this thread: case dismissed, plaintiff and his lawyer at each others' throats, Illinois defendants file for $58k in Rule 11 sanctions against them, and Mr. Meatloaf is still clowning it up at 2 am when he can't find a Gilligan's Island rerun.
George Gollin Wrote:Send us the money
by g-gollin on Thu Sep 16, 2010 2:31 am
g-gollin wrote:Just to put an endcap on this thread: case dismissed, plaintiff and his lawyer at each others' throats, Illinois defendants file for $58k in Rule 11 sanctions against them, and Mr. Meatloaf is still clowning it up at 2 am when he can't find a Gilligan's Island rerun.
The judge just ordered the YahooPlainDucks to pay money to the University of Illinois for having done the things they've done. Eat a grapefruit, Redlyne Doodlebag.
In fact, the defendants' frivolous sanction motion was denied by the court on September 14, 2010. Notice the word DENIED in big red letters at the top of the document.
Defendants recovered NOTHING on that motion, and, more specifically, they recovered NONE of the tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees that the Illinois taxpayers were forced to incur defending George Gollin's dissolute conduct as alleged in the complaint.
Defendants were awarded only their routine "costs," which include only such things as filing fees, postage and similar minor administrative expenses. On September 24, 2010 the defendants submitted a costs bill for only $1,107.47. Only off by ~5000%; not bad for someone who needed 15 other people to write his dissertation for him.
So once again, we must conclude either (a) George Gollin is a complete idiot and has no clue what is going on, or (b) George Gollin knows exactly what is going on but because he thinks you don't he chooses to lie about it instead.
Why is this so easy? Every time anybody takes ten minutes to verify George Gollin's outlandish claims the result is that George Gollin is exposed as a liar and a fraud. Is this his new defense strategy against future defamation actions--that since nobody could possibly take anything he says seriously he isn't damaging anyone with his lies?
Let the backpedalling begin (and the baby talk and bathroom metaphor continue).
Confirms what has been argued here for many years, that the higher ed accreditation system is broken, shrouded in secrecy and and mired in self-interest. Brief excerpt follows, entire report attached below.
Quote:Don’t Be a Barrier to Entry for New Innovative Colleges
New colleges are an even more important source of new ideas for improving higher education and one of the best ways to disrupt the status quo. Ensuring that new and innovative colleges can be established requires that the quality control mechanism is not used as a barrier to entry.
When accreditation was completely voluntary, the barrier to entry problem had not yet developed. Accreditors could of course deny a college their accreditation, but since that decision was not tied to any
federal money, the extent to which this discouraged new colleges was negligible.
From 1965 to 1985 we believe that accreditation was reasonably satisfactory in this regard. The system started out reasonably hospitable to different and new institutions (as long as it wasn’t for- profit). Even the traditional bias against for-profits was not insurmountable. When accreditors were first given their gatekeeper role, there were some “vocational, unaccredited schools for which there were no accrediting associations… [so] governmental officials had encouraged their development. For example, William Goddard, an owner of several well-known profit-making schools, organized the National Association of Trade and Technical Schools after such encouragement.”
Those days are long past however. The combinations of misbehavior by some schools (especially forprofits), and the shift towards an emphasis on compliance in accreditation reviews have created a hostile environment for new colleges.Many now argue that “the existing accrediting regime… hinders new institutions from entering and innovating” and “educational innovators say the process is inflexible and discourages creative approaches.” Accreditation now functions as a barrier to entry, keeping new institutions with innovative ideas from participating in the field.
Part of the problem is a “built-in catch-22 for innovators and entrepreneurs — you can’t be accredited (get access to public money) until you have proved yourself in advance. You can’t prove yourself in
advance—prospectively—unless you are accredited.” The difficulty of obtaining accreditation for a new institution has led many for-profit companies to buy struggling not-profit colleges just to inherit their accreditation. Entrepreneur Michael Clifford has suggested that regional accreditation has a fair market value of around $10 million to an acquirer, as that is the amount that it would take to start a regionally accredited college, a “process that could take up to ten years and has only a 50-50 chance of success.”
But even supposing the barrier to entry issue was resolved, there would still be a major problem. Accreditation focuses so heavily on inputs and processes that even if new institutions were allowed to
enter the field, they would be severely restricted in terms of what they could actually do. The system has evolved in such a way that it largely prescribes what inputs institutions should use and how they should use them. In other words, accreditors, while tasked with certifying the ends, have instead mandated the means to be used while almost completely ignoring the ends. But if the inputs that must be used and the way in which they are used are predetermined, that severely restricts the ability of new colleges to innovate. This “severely limits the advancement of new models of higher education” leading one observer to conclude that “accreditation today is the biggest barrier to innovation and change in higher education.”
Consider, for example, the case of StraighterLine, a company that offers a number of introductory courses. The company has an innovative business model that hosts traditional course material online, and arranges for online tutors to be available to students whenever they need help. This saves on the most costly resource used to provide an education—an instructor’s time. This allows StraighterLine to offer courses for a fraction of the cost of a standard college. However, the accreditation process restricts StraighterLine from selling its services directly to students, since only institutions, not courses, can be accredited. As a result StraighterLine is forced to partner with traditional universities, who often charge much more for the course.
Evaluation: Don’t be a barrier to entry for new innovative colleges. Accreditation did not serve as a barrier to entry for new innovative colleges prior to 1952 because it did not have the power to prevent entry. In the 1952–1985 era, accreditation performed satisfactorily in this regard. The expansion of higher education in this era forced accreditors to be lenient when it came to the standards for entry.However, in the period since 1985, accreditation has too often become a barrier to entry. It remains too embedded in its traditional measures of institutional quality to allow innovative ideas to gain momentum in transforming higher education from an inefficient system of the paper-based past to the modern and productive information-age economy. We therefore consider accreditation as performing unsatisfactory in this area.
Wouldn’t you think an “expert” in accreditation matters might know the difference between accredited and unaccredited? Well, a real expert would, but an idiot who appointed himself an expert like George Gollin (George D. Gollin, George Dana Gollin) could only screw it up.
Never one to disappoint, stalker George Gollin has declared that California-based West Coast University is a diploma mill, despite the fact that it is accredited by ACICS, a national accreditation agency recognized by the D of Ed and CHEA. Further, West Coast University’s nursing and dental hygiene programs are program accredited as well.
Let the backpedalling begin!
Quote: West Coast University is a senior university accredited by the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools (ACICS) to award Associate and Bachelor of Science Degrees in Nursing, Business Administration, Dental Hygiene, and Health Care Administration.
The Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools is listed by the United States Department of Education as a National Institutional Accrediting Agency. Its accreditation of degree-granting institutions also is recognized by the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA).
…The Baccalaureate Degree Program in Nursing is accredited by the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE).
…The Dental Hygiene program is accredited by the Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA) and has been granted the accreditation status of “initial accreditation.”
To preserve it for posterity--and possible defamation actions--here’s the latest incompetent scrawl from CHEA director and State of Illinois employee George Gollin:
George Gollin Wrote:West Coast University vs. West Coast University
by g-gollin on Sat Oct 16, 2010 10:48 pm
There are two different "West Coast University" things kicking around out there in the bitstream. There is WCU "in" California that plops the word "International" after its name here and there, and also [url]WCU "in" Panama[/url] that sometimes adds the word "Panama" after WCU.
The California WCU has a spluntingly gretchive web site, with its "faculty and administration" page rattling on about FERPA (which doesn't actually apply to the customers of a Goatbag), but not saying much of anything about its "professors."
The Panama WCU does not show its Management Committee wearing Panam hats, amusing though that might be. The PanaMoonian WCU team has our friends from the Nebraska Admiralty splendidly turned out in their business suits, as well as much of the Lloyd family.
The two WCU's are not friends. WCU-California whanged unsuccessfully on WCU-Panama in a WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center complaint in 2009. Sarfraz Lloyd, WCU-Panama Big Cheese, presents his side in his PresiNoodle's message:
Quote:Global Universities and their students/graduates face lot of problem in absence of a document that says this university or Institution is accredited by such and such accrediting agency. Some Institution cannot afford this costly process. Mistakenly global university with affiliated colleges in many nations, serving honestly under their set principles, vision and mission do not find a proper accreditation agency that could judge the suitability and the quality of the curricula of the courses offered by any global university.
On top of this major issue another issue is created to threat or horrify such global Universities are self-designated degree experts with their degree info blackmailing. They defame, disgrace and harm image of many global institutions, considering them as their divine right to defame the executives, teachers and students of such global institutions. They ignore the fact that global university does not mean just distance learning Institution that could be an institution working globally in many developing nations to help them to get proper knowledge / training /wisdom to get better employment to that helps to kill poverty in many families and nations.
Such persons and their degree info's mostly under wrong concept for example West Coast University (WCU) Panama has no operations in Singapore and china and never had any convocation/ graduation ceremony held in Singapore but still some cheaters using the name of WCU Panama and held the convocation sgforums.com/forums/10/topics/334550 - & forums.vr-zone.com/.../342710-discussion-mp-chan-soo-sena-s-uni-presence-sends-wrong-signal.html and many more with the reference of this news of the Straits Times .
They even did not check that the West Coast University mentioned on various websites is different than actual WCU Panama. The fake west Coast University even tried to cheat "The World Intellectual Property Organization, Arbitration and Mediation Center by filing case against us but God has His own ways to punish the cheaters , the Arbitration And Mediation Centre found their cheating in case No.D2009-0972...
I like it when the GoatBags mudwrestle with each other.
With less than six months left on her trumped up sentence, Dixie Randock is moving from Victorville to a halfway house near her family.
Bureau of Prisons records currently show her location as Seattle CCM (community corrections management), an administrative field office. Reliable sources tell us her ultimate destination is an RRC (Residential Reentry Center, or halfway house) within a short distance of her eastern Washington home.
Michael Milken, Martha Stewart, Chuck Berry....among the many who survived and thrived after their stints as guests of the government. Look for Dixie to achieve new heights as she continues her indomitable path through life.
One thing is certain...nobody will ever accuse George Gollin of being a "mastermind" of anything.
![[Image: egrant3.jpg]](http://www.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/giants/2006/04/27/egrant3.jpg)
![[Image: @grant%2520memorial.jpg]](http://bp3.blogger.com/_3pH8F1XaEYc/SD2dlqmO5II/AAAAAAAAADI/k_EfW6mkuq4/s320/@grant%2520memorial.jpg)
![[Image: GrantPlaque640h.jpg]](http://www.baseballreliquary.org/images/GrantPlaque640h.jpg)
![[Image: willie-mays.jpg]](http://www.dltruth.com/gollum/willie-mays.jpg)
![[Image: EddieGrant640h.jpg]](http://www.baseballreliquary.org/images/EddieGrant640h.jpg)
![[Image: 0208egrant.jpg]](http://www.worldwar1.com/tripwire/jpg/0208egrant.jpg)
![[Image: Eddie-Grant-Grave.jpg]](http://www.baseballphd.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Eddie-Grant-Grave.jpg)
