U. files response in scholarship suit

University lawyers asked the Philadelphia Common Pleas Court to dismiss a local legal center's suit that alleges the University does not provide enough Mayor's Scholarships to needy city high schoolers. In documents filed Monday, the University's preliminary response states that the suit spearheaded by the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia contains numerous allegations that are both "impertinent" and "erroneous." The University refuted PILCOP's claim that some of the plaintiffs have been injured, and said that since no injuries occurred, the organizations do not have the right to sue the University. But PILCOP attorney Michael Churchill said last night that the University was making technical arguments that miss the substance of the suit. He said that the response does not address PILCOP's main contention that the University is not providing the correct number of scholarships as prescribed by a city ordinance. "These are all technical reasons, they only go to small pieces of the complaint," Churchill said. "All of these are technical matters that can be easily supplied or corrected." The University also states in its objections that PILCOP failed to identify any contracts which bind the University to the plaintiff organizations and associations, which include unions and University groups. The University further contends that the organizations and groups represent members who live outside of Philadelphia, while the Mayor's Scholarship program is explicitly for Philadelphia students. The objections also state that PILCOP's allegations that the University was violating antitrust laws are both unfounded and "immaterial to any of the issues." In their complaint, filed last month, PILCOP also referred to discussions between the University and other schools regarding need-based financial aid, which were investigated for antitrust violations. But the University was never found to be in violation of antitrust laws and settled with the Justice Department over the summer. "[Those discussions] affected the amount of scholarship money they could give," Churchill said. "That is relevant." The University also added that its nationwide recruiting efforts are not relevant to the suit, despite PILCOP's inclusion of them in the suit. The University also filed an answer Monday to PILCOP's petition to have the case assigned to a single judge. The University has asked the court not to rule yet on PILCOP's request for a single judge but instead provide both parties with the opportunity to discuss the issue. "I think we will come to the same point in the end, these are a bunch of lawyers nitpicking," Churchill said. "They are arguing which rock they will step on to get across the stream, but we will both get to the other side."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.