Lawsuit against California Northstate CP

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I don't claim to know what Drake and Mercer want- they were just convenient examples of older programs at private schools.

I am only speculating that like most private schools, Drake and Mercer won't be happy if they lose their expected incoming students to their state school competition the week before classes start, and then have to offer the student withdrawing a full / large chunk of their deposit back.

Yeah but what can they do? Raise a stink? Arm wrestle?

Any type of collusion to fix deposit prices and/or policies between the separate schools can be construed as a gross violation of antitrust regulation.

Actually, I'm pretty sure any L-1 could make that argument and win.

Second thought: does anyone know the laws/regulations in other states about tuition deposits and refunds should a student not enroll? I wouldn't think AACP would waste time trying to change education/consumer protection laws.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Update

I reran my PACER query and this popped up. It's from June 11, 2012 and is the request for summary dismissal of the case from CNCP.

It's actually pretty well written, the juicy stuff is the whole discussion about whether or not CNCP violated federal laws in the alleged promoting/accepting of Title IV federal funds via a creative arrangement with an accredited school.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/99781041/Brazill-v-CNCP-motion-to-dismiss

Summary on that point: CNCP never actually "certified" anything to the federal government (how could it, CNCP wasn't even on the government's radar), therefore it did not violate any provisions of the law.
 
This school is fraudulent. Investor/faculty Dave Carroll who is head of experiential education will fail students on their rotation to profit from extra tuition paid in repeating rotations.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
How did you think you do during the rotation? What makes you think Pete does it for the tuition?
 
This school is fraudulent. Investor/faculty Dave Carroll who is head of experiential education will fail students on their rotation to profit from extra tuition paid in repeating rotations.[/QUOTE


Wow! I have a hard time believing that anybody at the school would do something that blatant just to make a buck!
 
This school is fraudulent. Investor/faculty Dave Carroll who is head of experiential education will fail students on their rotation to profit from extra tuition paid in repeating rotations.
Your assertion is ludicrous! How could Dave Carroll fail you for personal gain? He does not even assign points on APPEs and on IPPEs, the points assigned by his department are very minimal. For APPEs, we have a total of 1000 points, 700 assigned by your preceptor and 300 points assigned by your hub coordinator. For someone to fail, it means one of 2 things, an attitude problem or being so awful that you can't pull off 700 points! Look in the mirror .You failed;because you don't know your material and you probably have an attitude. If he failed you for personal gain, make a complaint with your real name and we will investigate this.BTW, I am Chike(Sac hub), come and find me if you are unhappy with my post.
 
Last edited:
This school is fraudulent. Investor/faculty Dave Carroll who is head of experiential education will fail students on their rotation to profit from extra tuition paid in repeating rotations.[/QUOTE


Wow! I have a hard time believing that anybody at the school would do something that blatant just to make a buck!

And I have a harder time believing that you are that gullible. :scared:
 
Is this the work around where the CNCP students did a online MBA so they would qualify for federal loans?

edit: Just read the lawsuit and its mentioned in it. I didn't know the school actually had recruiters from the online MBA come to their campus to enroll more students so they could divert their federal loans towards their pharmacy tuition.

This could explain why Midway college was discussing a MBA/PharmD dual degree program.
 
haha okay got my log in right after I posted that

No new documents since the 5/7/12 filing. There were additional documents as follows:

1) Summons for CNCP, LLC
2) Pre-trial hearing is set for 9/17/12 at 2pm in courtroom 5

The judge is requiring CNCP, LLC to disclose its parent company and any entity owning > 10% of the university. Failure to do so will result in sanctions...woohoo, so we'll get to figure out who owns this place.


Bumpity bump

I'm not a pre-pharmacy guy, but I am a premedical guy.

Coincidentally, I've only come across this thread, today, after calling admissions for the Northstate University College of Medicine earlier this week.

Since the college of medicine is not accredited at this point, but the pharmacy school is, I'm wondering if the college of medicine will be adversely affected by any of the problems mentioned in this thread, or not.

Anyhow, does anyone have any updates about the goings on mentioned in the lawsuit and what have you, here? Thanks
 
Since the college of medicine is not accredited at this point, but the pharmacy school is, I'm wondering if the college of medicine will be adversely affected by any of the problems mentioned in this thread, or not.

FYI the pharmacy school is WASC accredited, but not ACPE accredited.
 
Some nice tidbits from the document:

"During plaintiff’s employment, the College was acandidate for accreditation by the Western Association of Schoolsand Colleges (“WASC”). (Id. ¶ 19.) In October 2010, members ofWASC visited the College to assess its candidacy. (Id. ¶ 20.)When WASC members asked plaintiff to give an assessment as towhether the College had appropriate resources to complete itsmission, he responded that it did not. (Id.) In several follow-up meetings, plaintiff reasserted that the College had insufficient resources and explained that the College’s cost-cutting measures put profits before students’ education. "


"After plaintiff’s termination, the College allegedly replaced him with Sonya Frausto, an assistant professor at the College, who is thirty-six years old. (Id. ¶ 35.) Plaintiff alleges that apart from community pharmacy practice, Dr. Fraustodoes not have the same breadth of experience that he has."
 
Members don't see this ad :)
The original reply by CNCP from back on 10-12-12

http://www.scribd.com/doc/111089691/CNCP-Initial-Response-10-12-12

If you read it...it's kind of funny. CNCP's attorneys (William A. Muñoz - 191649
Kerri L. Ruzicka - 222706 MURPHY, PEARSON, BRADLEY & FEENEY) sound like bitter elementary school children with the writing skill of a pensive 16 year old emo kid.

heheheheh, I guess CNCP really went scraping the bottom of the barrel for the best deal.
 
This is unbelievable. Just found the lawsuit doing some research on Pharmacy schools. The Court ruled that Northstate couldn't dismiss the lawsuit. Northstate's defense is really weak. They are in for a ton of trouble- violating the Federal Whistleblower Act and age discrimination against Mr. brazill. Shame on the ACPE for allowing colleges like this to pop up.
 
Still following this lawsuit, no real substantial changes over the past few months.

1) As of 3/18/13, defendants (CNCP): new attorney Brittany Ng is on board, replacing Kerri Ruzicka. She's cute, I've met her socially, don't ask, it's a weird story.

2) CNCP asked for more time to depose Brad Brazill per filing on 3/7/13 -- apparently they want to question him about all his social networking posts....which leads me to:

SDN MAKES AN APPEARANCE IN THE OFFICIAL LAWSUIT FILINGS!


There is confusion in the deposition about whether Brazill posted in one of these threads or not, I couldn't discern. It is clear he has an account on here. I will have to find the full transcript of the deposition, but there are about 7 hours (with more to go).

http://www.scribd.com/doc/131755017/Brazill-vs-CNCP-filing-3-7-13

Scroll down to page 15/22, specifically Lakeboy and the CNCP accreditation discussion thread is mentioned. I cannot find the rest of the deposition.

So, for the attorneys for CNCP or Bradley Brazill reading this, HELLO! BOOBIES!:love::love:
 
Still following this lawsuit, no real substantial changes over the past few months.

1) As of 3/18/13, defendants (CNCP): new attorney Brittany Ng is on board, replacing Kerri Ruzicka. She's cute, I've met her socially, don't ask, it's a weird story.

2) CNCP asked for more time to depose Brad Brazill per filing on 3/7/13 -- apparently they want to question him about all his social networking posts....which leads me to:

SDN MAKES AN APPEARANCE IN THE OFFICIAL LAWSUIT FILINGS!


There is confusion in the deposition about whether Brazill posted in one of these threads or not, I couldn't discern. It is clear he has an account on here. I will have to find the full transcript of the deposition, but there are about 7 hours (with more to go).

http://www.scribd.com/doc/131755017/Brazill-vs-CNCP-filing-3-7-13

Scroll down to page 15/22, specifically Lakeboy and the CNCP accreditation discussion thread is mentioned. I cannot find the rest of the deposition.

So, for the attorneys for CNCP or Bradley Brazill reading this, HELLO! BOOBIES!:love::love:

Lakeboy had a strong hatred toward CNCP. I bet it was Mr Brazill.
 
DANG! I have never seen a deposit that high in my life. The max I have seen is around $500. I paid no deposit for the school I am currently going to.

Most schools nowadays ask for 1000$ ... I have not seen anything lower.
 
Most schools nowadays ask for 1000$ ... I have not seen anything lower.

Most of the schools I applied to were $0-$500. The only exception was the only "new" school I considered, which was $1000.
 
I seem 500 from accredited schools. Some 500 for new schools. Most are in the 1000 range, some even in the 2000 range.

I wonder if it depends on tuition then because my school was only $200 ...
 
Most for me were $1000, with one expection that was $100.
 
I had a newer school that was $1500 (3 monthly payments of $500), while the school I accepted was one $500 payment.
 
My sister graduated from northstate in its inaugural class. She passed her boards and law exams for California and national all first try. And now she's doing very well. Just pick whatever school you think is a good fit for you
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Update - actually, not really an update. I logged into my PACER account and had a look see if there was anything new. Not really...this thing hasn't gone to full trial yet, and neither CNCP (or CNUCOP, whatever your flavor) nor the defendant (Mr. Brazill) have settled.

But yeah, there were a lot of documents...I breezed through a proposed verdict form and a list of witnesses, that's about it.

Just letting everyone I'm sortof half-monitoring the outcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Update - again not an update, I only remembered to check because I saw some news about the country of Brazil (random I know). But the trial begins on Monday, April 13, 2015 (wow that's on Monday). Surprised this is going to trial, CNCP likely believes they will prevail.

I forgot my PACER log-in so I'm relying on the GPO upload of the court doc from last year.

Again, half-monitoring on my end. Cheers.
 
Fetti- aren't you an amateur CA water rights expert? Is Governor Brown's action really as significant as it is being made out to be?

Sortof...it's a lot of cuts, but seriously all California needs to do is stop producing almonds and wala, we have plenty of water for everyone else. There is no water shortage, it's a shortage for agriculture -- people will pay for the water more than agriculture, and thus the rest of the country will have to pay for their fruits and nuts.
 
Final Update

The case has been dismissed. It got to day #2 of jury trial on 4/15/2015 and that morning the lawyers requested dismissal after reaching an out-of-court agreement.

Which means no fun things read as there's probably a big fat NDA in there and everything occurs out of the public eye. Darn. My guess is CNCP lost, I'll explain at the bottom, here is the evidence & witness list that was the be presented at trial (I bolded and made large the fun stuff). Further, there are the basic transcripts of the trial:

I usually do not copy/paste these documents and upload them instead to scribd, but I just wanted to get this update out and done with.

Also NOTE for any mods out there, the following documents are legal filings with the United States District Court (Eastern District) and are thus public records, the information below is freely available in the public domain. Please do not censor or edit below in the name of "privacy" because none of that exists at this point (at which point then I'll just post the court filing itself).

Attorneys for Defendant
CALIFORNIA NORTHSTATE COLLEGE OF PHARMACY, LLC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT BRADLEY BRAZILL, Plaintiff, v. CALIFORNIA NORTHSTATE COLLEGE OF PHARMACY, LLC; CALIFORNIA NORTHSTATE UNIVERSITY, LLC, and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants. Case No.: 2:12CV-01218-WBS-GGH DEFENDANT CALIFORNIA NORTHSTATE COLLEGE OF PHARMACY, LLC'S PRETRIAL DISCLOSURES [FRCP 26(a)(3)] Trial Date: April 14, 2015 Time: 9:00 a.m. Courtroom: 5 Honorable William J. Shubb Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3), Defendant CALIFORNIA NORTHSTATE COLLEGE OF PHARMACY, LLC hereby provides the following information about the evidence that it may present at trial, other than solely for impeachment. Defendant reserves its right to supplement or modify this list.

I. WITNESSES Defendant intends to present the following witnesses at the time of trial:
1. Bradley Brazill, 4205 Vistosa Drive, Davis, CA 95616, (530) 753-0235;
2. Stacey Brazill, 4205 Vistosa Drive, Davis, CA 95616, (530) 753-0235;
3. David Hawkins, 120 N. Clovis Avenue, Clovis, CA 93612, (559) 325-3600;
4. Alvin Cheung, 10811 International Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (916) 631- 8108;
5. Norman Fong, 10811 International Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (916) 631- 8108;
6. Yasmin Vera, 10811 International Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (916) 631- 8108;
7. David Carroll, 10811 International Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (916) 631- 8108;
8. Grant Lackey, 120 N. Clovis Avenue, Clovis, CA 93612, (559) 325-3600;
9. Sonya Frausto, 10811 International Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (916) 631- 8108;
10. James Palmieri, 10811 International Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (916) 631- 8108;
11. Karen Sproats, 10811 International Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (916) 631- 8108;
12. Maureen Lloy, 635 Anderson Road, Suite 10, Davis, CA 95616, (530) 758-1122;
13. Paul Nguyen, 10811 International Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (916) 631- 8108;
14. Chike Okolo, 3300 Capital Center Drive, Apt. 32, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (530) 635-2677;
15. Mary Farrell (expert witness), 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1610, Sacramento, CA 95814, (916) 449-3933;
16. Sandra Harris-Byrd/PMK, Department of Veterans Affairs re job offer to Plaintiff, 10535 Hospital Way, Mather, CA 95655, (916) 366-5366.

Defendant may call the following witnesses if the need arises:
1. Kiki Forsyth, 10811 International Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (916) 631- 8108;
2. Paul Wagstaffe, 10811 International Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670, (916) 631- 8108;
3. William A. Muñoz, 520 Capitol Mall, Suite 250, Sacramento, CA 95814, (916) 565-0300
4. Gregory A. Bastian, 4700 College Oak Drive, Sacramento, CA 95841, (916) 484- 8011;
5. Jennifer West, 120 N. Clovis Avenue, Clovis, CA 93612, (559) 325-3600;
6. Sara Fox, 4000 East 30th Avenue, Eugene, OR 97405, (541) 463-3100;

Defendant expects to present the following witness’ testimony by deposition:
1. Lane Brunner, 3900 University Blvd., Tyler, Texas 75799, (903) 566-7000

II. EXHIBITS Defendant expects to offer the following exhibits at trial:

1. April 8, 2009 Letter from David Hawkins to Bradley Brazill;
2. August 6, 2009 Employee Handbook & At-Will Employee Status Acknowledgement;
3. July 15, 2010 Honor Code of the California Northstate College of Pharmacy;
4. CNCP Faculty Handbook 2010-2011;
5. August 1, 2010 Personnel Action Request for Bradley Brazill;
6. March 10, 2011 Bradley Brazill E-mail entitled “What Happens when men bake Valentine cookies;
7. July 15, 2011 Notice to Employee as to Change in Relationship;
8. July 21, 2011 email from Dean David Hawkins to Faculty re appointment of Sonya Frausto as Interim Department Chair;
9. August 1, 2011 Personnel Action Request for Sonya Frausto’s appointment to Interim Department Chair;
10. Curriculum Vitae of James Palmieri, Pharm.D.;
11. November 3, 2011 Itinerary for James Palmieri Candidate Interview;
12. August 5, 2013 Report of Mary Farrell;
13. Subpoenaed records from Apothecary Botanica dba El Macero Pharmacy;
14. Plaintiff’s blog posts from Student Doctor’s Network;
15. Plaintiff’s e-mail with North Korean’s leader photo;
16. Plaintiff’s e-mail with Chike Okolo with Taliban fighter picture;

17. Plaintiff’s applications declining health care coverage (personnel file);
18. Plaintiff’s personnel file;
19. Yasmin Vera’s memorandum regarding Brazill investigation;
20. Diagram identifying Defendant’s staff and faculty in 2011 and their respective birthdates;
21. Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint;
22. Subpoenaed records from Department of Veterans Affairs;
23. Emails from [email protected] to Alvin Cheung and Norman Fong

Day #1
Jury Trial (Day 1): 9:05 a.m. Trial commences. Jury present. Court addresses jurors, jury voir dire oath given. Court begins voir dire. 10:18 a.m. Plaintiff and defendant's counsel question jurors. 10:30 a.m. Court excuses remaining jurors in the audience section and orders jurors in box to return after morning recess. Court confers with counsel regarding challenges for cause and preemptories. 10:35 a.m. Court takes morning recess. 10:45 a.m. Trial resumes outside presence of jury. Court confers with counsel regarding preemptory challenges and motions in limine. 10:56 a.m. Jury returns. Court announces selected jurors to be seated for trial. 11:00 a.m. Jury panel sworn. Court presents pretrial instructions to jury panel. 11:30 a.m. Court takes lunch recess. 12:30 p.m. Trial resumes outside presence of the jury. Court confers with counsel re motions in limine and states findings as noted on the record. Court DENIES Defendant's motion in limine #2 (docket #74) to exclude the "Separation Agreement and General Release." The ruling on remaining motions in limine shall be held in abeyance pending the introduction of evidence at time of trial Case 2:12-cv-01218-WBS-EFB Document 129 Filed 04/14/15 Page 1 of 2 2 (dockets #61 through #73). 12:50 .m. Court recessed. 1:00 p.m. Trial resumes. Jury returns. Plaintiff presents opening statements. 1:17 p.m. Defendant presents opening statements. 1:39 p.m. Witness Bradley Jay Brazill called and sworn to testify by Plaintiff. [Exhibits Identified and/or Admitted: 1.] 2:30 p.m. Court recessed. 2:55 p.m. Trial resumes. Jury returns. Witness resumes on direct by Plaintiff. [Exhibits Identified and/or Admitted: 7.] 3:52 p.m. Witness on cross-examination by Defendant. [Exhibits Identified and/or Admitted: 1, B, C, D, U, E, H.] 4:30 p.m. Jury excused and ordered to return on 4/15/2015 at 9:00 a.m. Court confers with counsel re witnesses to be called. 4:45 p.m. Court Adjourned. Jury Trial continued to April 15, 2015 at 8:30 A.M.

Day #2
Jury Trial (Day 2): 8:30 a.m. Trial resumes outside presence of the jury. Counsel inform the Court that the matter has been resolved and request time to confer. 8:35 a.m. Court recessed. 8:45 a.m. Trial resumes outside presence of the jury. Court confers with counsel re the terms of the settlement agreement, as stated on the record. Court shall retain jurisdiction until final the final stipulation of dismissal and payment of settlement have been completed. The parties shall execute the settlement agreement by 4/17/2015. Counsel inform the Court that plaintiff and defendant are in agreement with the terms. 8:50 a.m. Court recessed. 9:00 a.m. Trial resumes. Jury returns. Court informs jury that the matter has been resolved. Jury is excused from this action. 9:10 a.m. Court Adjourned.
 
My thoughts here: CNCP folded. Look at the freaking **** show that would have ensued putting ALL those people on the witness stand to testify under oath in public record, and look at all that random crap from "private" email that would have been made public had this fully gone to trial.

This was the defendant's list, I get that, but it was set a while back and whatever Brazill said on the stand likely spurred the rapid conclusion we saw in day #2.

Unfortunately, we will never know the outcome...unless you see Mr. Brazill rolling around town in a shiny new Benz or something.
 
So this final sign-off for this case, it's been fun reporting. The only reason I stumbled across it was I found my PACER log-in again because I needed to look up some bankruptcy filing in Atlanta for this one company, and decided to check-in again. Cheers everyone!
 
Top