Sidwell Paid a family $50K and agree to change grades??????????

[Anonymous]

I suspect they're also trying to make sure their daughter gets the job of her choice and intimidate companies/grad schools into accepting her or else face bad publicity and lawsuits.

but hey, it's their right to sue so that's ok....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is false. The family did not pay sidwell fees. You people will go so far to disparage a family. No wonder people do not speak up.

Here's the link to the DC Superior Court e-access system, if you want it: https://eaccess.dccourts.gov/eaccess/search.page.3.2?x=HGD3Ublw3CoRtM8j3lZRlXk1PFPVd6P-N4Z4QVy66LhV-jsQhEAKTMG4zmgWt0vdvLYXs5ur2YugTApDxrA-jYZkl3iWULunlAJIEdorXyYwoGZoci7KhrAGlJaxILVyXfdEQ2Bgy37LZ2KCTDDEzUMcd4nk0Aw59XjF8ulhQMw. Should that fail, go to [url]https://eaccess.dccourts.gov [/url ]and search for the name Titilayo Adetu. On January 23, 2019 the appeals court upheld the trial court order which granted Sidwell $37,834.58 in costs.

I looked it up and you lied. The $37,834.58 was to cover the cost of recording the precedings at the request of the parties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow they are truly grifters. Feel sorry for the teachers who had to endure their behavior.

The dad seems like a real “prince.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is false. The family did not pay sidwell fees. You people will go so far to disparage a family. No wonder people do not speak up.

Here's the link to the DC Superior Court e-access system, if you want it: https://eaccess.dccourts.gov/eaccess/search.page.3.2?x=HGD3Ublw3CoRtM8j3lZRlXk1PFPVd6P-N4Z4QVy66LhV-jsQhEAKTMG4zmgWt0vdvLYXs5ur2YugTApDxrA-jYZkl3iWULunlAJIEdorXyYwoGZoci7KhrAGlJaxILVyXfdEQ2Bgy37LZ2KCTDDEzUMcd4nk0Aw59XjF8ulhQMw. Should that fail, go to [url]https://eaccess.dccourts.gov [/url ]and search for the name Titilayo Adetu. On January 23, 2019 the appeals court upheld the trial court order which granted Sidwell $37,834.58 in costs.

[b]Litigation has gone on since 2013. The average person should be able to estimate that the legal fees would be more than that amount.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is false. The family did not pay sidwell fees. You people will go so far to disparage a family. No wonder people do not speak up.

Here's the link to the DC Superior Court e-access system, if you want it: https://eaccess.dccourts.gov/eaccess/search.page.3.2?x=HGD3Ublw3CoRtM8j3lZRlXk1PFPVd6P-N4Z4QVy66LhV-jsQhEAKTMG4zmgWt0vdvLYXs5ur2YugTApDxrA-jYZkl3iWULunlAJIEdorXyYwoGZoci7KhrAGlJaxILVyXfdEQ2Bgy37LZ2KCTDDEzUMcd4nk0Aw59XjF8ulhQMw. Should that fail, go to [url]https://eaccess.dccourts.gov [/url ]and search for the name Titilayo Adetu. On January 23, 2019 the appeals court upheld the trial court order which granted Sidwell $37,834.58 in costs.

I looked it up and you lied. The $37,834.58 was to cover the cost of recording the precedings at the request of the parties.

It seems that the scammy “@aol” Supreme Court advocate is still spinning for his grifter clients.

[Anonymous]

Our DC graduated in the plaintiff daughtet’s class. She was an unremarkable student by SFS standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then grade properly.

Here's the entirety evidence of grading discrimination in Math II, as excerpted from the petition for writ of certiorari:

"Ms. Kozibrodzka had given Dayo a recurrent 68% on four (4) Math tests, recurrent scores of 89% on quizzes, and recurrent scores of 70% on extra-credit assignments. Id. Kozibrodzka continued to manipulate Dayo’s grades to her detriment. Id. On one occasion Kozibrodzka conceded that her grading was incorrect and was forced, by Dayo’s protest before the entire class, to change her grade from an 81% to an 89%."

The first two sentences just state grades that were less than A's. We don't know whether they were earned or whether some mistake was made by the teacher. There is no indication that the family has retained any of the original papers and presented them in a lower court as evidence. Nor do we know that this teacher was any more error prone with Ms. Adetu's papers than she was with other students' papers. The last sentence simply says that the math teacher corrected a grading error in Ms. Adetu's favor. Teachers of all subject sometimes write test questions that are unclear or make marking errors. What is important is that the errors get corrected, which it did in this case.

Here is the entirety of the family's evidence of discrimination in calculus: "Mr. Markey, Dayo’s Calculus teacher during her 2012-2013 scholastic year, followed Ms. Kozibrodzka’s example and began manipulating Dayo’s math grades as well. For the fall calculus course, Mr. Markey graded Dayo as an “A-” instead of an “A,” although Dayo had earned a final score of 93.112%, which according to Sidwell’s own policy constitutes an “A.” It may be true that Ms. Adetu's average in calculus was over 93%. Without seeing the grades and the weighting policy, it's impossible to know. However, it does seem like a stretch that this was a coordinated, racist campaign between two teachers and an administrator.

This whole thing looks so scammy. The family's attorney, who represented them through the failed civil suit, does not list the Supreme Court Bar in the bar memberships on his website biography (http://bakersimmonslaw.com/about_us). He's also using an AOL address for professional purposes (it's listed on the petition for writ of certiorari) which is not very professional, nor secure. (It may also be a violation of the AOL terms of service: https://legal.aol.com/legacy/terms-of-service/full-terms/index.html.)

BTW, in the last week, the family has been shopping this story to the media. It's shown up on CNN, Essence, and Blavist. If you don't believe the intention is to retribution against Sidwell at all costs, you're not paying attention.

[b]All of this is public information. Just as you have access, so does the press. One can not conclude that they are shopping it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our DC graduated in the plaintiff daughtet’s class. She was an unremarkable student by SFS standards.

[/b]She graduated from Penn and now is a master student. What is the relevance of your opinion? Who is yor DC so we can look them up.

[Anonymous]

WTF is “Blavist”? LOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our DC graduated in the plaintiff daughtet’s class. She was an unremarkable student by SFS standards.

[/b]She graduated from Penn and now is a master student. What is the relevance of your opinion? Who is yor DC so we can look them up.

Is a “master student” like a “road scholar”?

[Anonymous]

Whenever someone points out that no Sidwell student, including her, should have an entitled expectation of admission to an Ivy League university, her “lawyer” responds that’she was admitted to Penn.

And that logically leads to the question: Just what are her real damages here?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our DC graduated in the plaintiff daughtet’s class. She was an unremarkable student by SFS standards.

[/b]She graduated from Penn and now is a master student. What is the relevance of your opinion? Who is yor DC so we can look them up.

Is a “master student” like a “road scholar”?

[b]It means she did sufficiently well to gain admission to PENN twice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whenever someone points out that no Sidwell student, including her, should have an entitled expectation of admission to an Ivy League university, her “lawyer” responds that’she was admitted to Penn.

And that logically leads to the question: Just what are her real damages here?!

Breaching the contract and costing her a year after sending fabricated transcripts.[b]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our DC graduated in the plaintiff daughtet’s class. She was an unremarkable student by SFS standards.

[/b]She graduated from Penn and now is a master student. What is the relevance of your opinion? Who is yor DC so we can look them up.

Is a “master student” like a “road scholar”?

[b]It means she did sufficiently well to gain admission to PENN twice.

So even if she had a claim which three levels of courts have rejected - how exactly was she damaged by Sidwell’s alleged conduct? That but for Sidwell she would have been admitted to Harvard or Yale twice?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whenever someone points out that no Sidwell student, including her, should have an entitled expectation of admission to an Ivy League university, her “lawyer” responds that’she was admitted to Penn.

And that logically leads to the question: Just what are her real damages here?!

Breaching the contract and costing her a year after sending fabricated transcripts.[b]

There’s just one little problem with that theory: the DC trial court, the DC court of appeals and the US Supreme Court all rejected this fanciful claim.