Loading...
Phillip Closius was removed from his position as the dean of the University of Baltimore School of Law back in July. When Closius lost his position as dean he called out the administration of the school, claiming that they took money from the law school to help fund other programs on campus. The president of the university, Robert Bogomolny, vehemently denied the claims. He said that the school used only 14 percent of money made by the law school for the 2010-2011 school year, not 45 percent, which was the claim made by Closius.
A new study conducted by the Maryland Department of Legislative Services shows that the law school at the University of Baltimore has made the school a ton of money recently. In 2010, the law school put $8.8 million into the school’s general budget, which accounts for 31 percent of its revenue. The only other public law school in the state, Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, put 11 percent of its revenue into its university’s general budget. The 11 percent was worth $2.8 million.
“The report verifies what the dispute was about,” said Closius, according to Law.com’s The National Law Journal. Closius is still employed as a member of the faculty at the school. “I think that, historically, the law school has supported the entire University of Baltimore. This is a long-term problem.”
An increase in tuition in 2011 for the law school generated $1.45 million more in revenue, with $80,000 of that money being sent to the university’s general budget. Bogomolny released a written statement on February 28:
“As the [University of Baltimore] law budget committee determined last fall, there is no single standard used by law schools to calculate costs.”
Get JD Journal in Your Mail
Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!
Garret Halbach wrote the report and said, “In the fall, it was decided that the law school funding warranted additional analysis. The proportion of indirect costs allocated to a school should mirror the proportion of institutional enrollment the school represents.”
Close to 28 percent of students at the University of Baltimore are law students but the law school had to pay 37 percent of the indirect costs for the university. Seventeen percent of students at the University of Maryland are law students, with indirect costs of 8 percent being paid for by their law school, according to the report.
“There is a big difference,” Halbach said. “But they are very different schools. The law program at the University of Baltimore is huge, whereas at [the University of Maryland] the medical and nursing schools are much larger.”
In the statement written by Bogomolny on February 28, he said that the added revenue would go towards additional faculty members, help with operating costs and would be used for student scholarships for law students.
“It helps to stop the bleeding,” Closius said. “But we’re still paying $8.8 million, when it should be more like $2.8 million. The students have a right to know what their tuition is being used for.”
