Grand jury awards one-year MBA students $3500 settlement
By: Amy Peterson
Issue date: 8/19/05 Section: News
Originally published: 8/19/05 at 1:14 AM EST
Last update: 8/19/05 at 1:13 AM EST
Originally published: 8/19/05 at 1:14 AM EST
Last update: 8/19/05 at 1:13 AM EST
Hinkey feels that the University should have made an attempt to schedule another trip, even if it was just to Canada or Mexico. He says there were many alternatives that they were not willing to investigate.
The University then offered another trip with the 2004 class which was unappealing to many of the students, because the students either had jobs or were searching for jobs that would prohibit them from going on an international trip at a later date, according to Hinkey.
Soon after the alternative of an international seminar and a possible future trip was offered, the students began the process of getting an attorney involved. Cieminiecki claims the University was contacted many times during this time, but nothing came of it.
Judge Sandra Moss reviewed the case and gave the students a favorable ruling in January of 2004. At this point, said Cieminiecki, it became a question of how much the University would have to give the students.
When the students asked for $14,000 per student in compensation the University felt the amount was not in line with their perceived losses, according to Rossiter.
At the hearing in June, the University implied that all 68 students that were to attend the China trip were in the same boat. However, only 24 of the 68 were in the one-year MBA program, and 28 of the remaining 44 went on other trips. In addition, the one-year MBA students paid for their own tuition, as opposed to many of the other MBA students, who had their place of work paying for them, according to Cieminiecki. Cieminiecki wonders if the University misled the court.
Out of the 24 people in the class, 18 filed suit against the University. However, three of the 18 were unable to attend the case and therefore received no part of the settlement. One lives in Florida, one was on a business trip, and the other is in the Army. Since the students received notice on Friday that the case was being heard on Tuesday, these three could not be present.
The University then offered another trip with the 2004 class which was unappealing to many of the students, because the students either had jobs or were searching for jobs that would prohibit them from going on an international trip at a later date, according to Hinkey.
Soon after the alternative of an international seminar and a possible future trip was offered, the students began the process of getting an attorney involved. Cieminiecki claims the University was contacted many times during this time, but nothing came of it.
Judge Sandra Moss reviewed the case and gave the students a favorable ruling in January of 2004. At this point, said Cieminiecki, it became a question of how much the University would have to give the students.
When the students asked for $14,000 per student in compensation the University felt the amount was not in line with their perceived losses, according to Rossiter.
At the hearing in June, the University implied that all 68 students that were to attend the China trip were in the same boat. However, only 24 of the 68 were in the one-year MBA program, and 28 of the remaining 44 went on other trips. In addition, the one-year MBA students paid for their own tuition, as opposed to many of the other MBA students, who had their place of work paying for them, according to Cieminiecki. Cieminiecki wonders if the University misled the court.
Out of the 24 people in the class, 18 filed suit against the University. However, three of the 18 were unable to attend the case and therefore received no part of the settlement. One lives in Florida, one was on a business trip, and the other is in the Army. Since the students received notice on Friday that the case was being heard on Tuesday, these three could not be present.
