testmasters v. blueprint: it's all over for real.

[julie anne]

The sun has set on a four-year showdown between law school admission test preparation companies Testmasters and Blueprint Test Preparation, which I took to prepare for the December LSAT.

Here's a bit of the release from the Blueprint website:

"After over four years of litigation, a 25-day trial spanning over three months, and more alcohol imbibed by the defendants than was strictly speaking healthy, the trial between Testmasters and Blueprint is done. Finito. Gone like Donkey Kong.

On June 15, 2009, Judge William Highberger entered the statement of decision and DENIED the permanent injunction sought by Testmasters against Blueprint and UPHELD the jury's verdict."

Read the decision in full here.

If you don't feel like reading the whole thing, because, dude, it's summer, here's my understanding of what went down:

Blueprint Test Preparation was started several years ago by former Testmasters instructors, who started Blueprint four months before the end of their Testmasters teaching gigs. According to Testmasters, since Blueprint founders were disloyal to the company, they had to pay back wages earned from Testmasters during those last four months and any profit earned from Blueprint during those four months.

Testmasters representatives also implied that Blueprint materials were derived from Testmasters' materials.

A jury last year found that Blueprint and its employees were liable on some causes of action. The jury awarded damages to Testmasters, in the amount of 1% of the originally sought amount. Judge Highberger upheld the jury verdict, and further stated that Blueprint materials were distinct from Testmasters' materials.

Some of the Testmasters more PR-y tactics used during the litigation included: disseminating inflammatory fliers about Blueprint on college campuses, editing deposition videos for use on a website called "Blueprint Blues," and an endless stream of cease and desist letters.

If you're a Law 360 subscriber, you can read a story they wrote here.

Comments

[Corntrollio]

Wow, these Testmasters people are about as nutty at protecting their illegal monopoly as BarBri.

[Corntrollio]

correction: "These Testmasters people are about as nutty as BarBri protecting its illegal monopoly."

[Merkin]

It's funny that TestMasters sues people for "stealing" "their" intellectual property, and now they are being sued for the same thing. Suckers even admit that they are doing it!

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19590323/LSAC-sues-Robin-Singh-Part-1

[Irina Lymar]

TestMasters and the LSAC have settled their licensing dispute. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, the parties have filed a joint request that the court dismiss the lawsuit. TestMasters has paid the LSAC the full $1,047,490 owed under the previous license, and the LSAC has granted a new license to TestMasters.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19856366/New- ... d-the-LSAC

TestMasters is not and has never been opposed to paying the LSAC for the right to use authentic LSAT questions. The crux of the dispute was that TestMasters did not want to pay licensing fees if its competitors and other third parties were not. The licensing fees are considerable, and fairness dictates that if TestMasters should pay, then everyone else should also pay. We are happy that we were able to reach an amicable resolution to this matter.

Irina Lymar
Programs Director
TestMasters

[Cardinal]

TestMasters v. Blueprint: It's NOT all over for real

Julie Anne's blog post is misleading, at best. The litigation between TestMasters and Blueprint is far from over. The jury found Blueprint owner Trent Teti liable for breach of duty of loyalty and breach of employment contract. The jury also found Blueprint owners Matt Riley and Jodi Triplett liable for defamation. Furthermore, the jury found that Teti was guilty of malice. Blueprint was dissatisfied with the jury's verdict and has appealed. TestMasters has also appealed, claiming that the $261,000 awarded in compensatory damages was too low.

The case has put Blueprint in a difficult position financially. Prior to the jury trial, the judge issued monetary sanctions of over $1.5 million against Blueprint for years of discovery abuse that included destroying evidence and committing perjury. Blueprint has also appealed the sanctions judgments, which now total over $2 million due to the interest that has accrued.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24327374/Blueprint-LSAT-Prep-Sanctioned-Over-1-6-Million

[Cardinal]

Blueprint owners Matt Riley and Jodi Triplett incriminated themselves by admitting on the witness stand that they had previously lied under oath.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23735229/Matt-Riley-of-Blueprint-LSAT-Prep-Confesses-to-Felony

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23731362/Blueprint-LSAT-Prep-President-Admits-She-Committed-Perjury

Former Blueprint instructor Courtney Martin, who was also a defendant in the case, testified in 2008 that all of the Blueprint owners conspired together to conceal evidence and commit perjury.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmBGY0fYd3w&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLS3hLfvQh8&feature=related

In November of 2009 Martin paid TestMasters $150,000 to settle its case against her.

[Cardinal]

TestMasters also filed suit against Thomas McCarthy, a former graphic designer for TestMasters, who provided Teti with stolen copies of the digital source files for the TestMasters LSAT course. In that trial, the jury found that McCarthy was liable for Blueprint's entire first year of profit, which was slightly more than $350,000. And like Teti, McCarthy was also found guilty of malice.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/17118749/Jury-Verdicts-Against-Trent-Teti-and-Blueprint-LSAT-Prep

McCarthy was also ordered to pay more than $250,000 to TestMasters for its attorneys' fees and costs. The final judgment against McCarthy was well over $600,000.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24327474/Final-Judgment-Against-Tom-McCarthy

So why were Teti and McCarthy both found guilty of malice? Forensic examiners recovered emails from Teti's computer revealing that Teti offered to perform oral sex on McCarthy for helping him steal the TestMasters course files. When Teti actually received the files, he told McCarthy "you're a god" and promised that McCarthy would "never be cited as the source of these files."

http://www.scribd.com/doc/4261610/Teti-McCarthy-Emails

The multiple appeals filed by Blueprint and TestMasters will likely not be resolved until late 2010 or early 2011. So that is the earliest that this litigation will be "all over for real".

[Julie Fern]

Robin Singh is an unscrupulous fruitcake and plants his shills in various forums. If you pick TM for your LSAT prep, you are being suckered. Testmasters is as phony as 3 dollar bill.

[generic cialis]

I'mm 22, and love movies, but there are a lot of classic movies and other really popular movies that I haven't seen. I just signed up for Netflix and want to expand my movie repitoire. Any suggestions?

[buy ativan]

Julie Anne's blog post is misleading, at best. The litigation between TestMasters and Blueprint is far from over. The jury found Blueprint owner Trent Teti

[viagra online]

Like a certain medieval hot period that has been "smoothed" out of existence just because it was inconvenient. But then again, that must not be a "surprise" to you and all those "respected scientists" you talk of. Because to you it is clearly all about respect really and how you get to that position where you have it so you can throw it around like it adds up to something, everything else is just a background.

[new balance]

Very casual opened your blog, but let me not to die, because you let me enjoy the share many happy. I really like your articles, have good taste, and taste. I will continue to focus on your articles, remember many updated! Thank you, wish you happy!

[mbt shoes]

But, as long as the Japanese government slightly stability, http://www.mbtusasale.com/

[mbt shoes]

the Ming dynasty immediately launched the tributary with trade, http://www.mbtusasale.com/

[ugg australia]

according to the tributary trade practices, http://www.uggsaleaustralia.com/

[keylogger Mac]

Robin Singh is an unscrupulous fruitcake and plants his shills in various forums. If you pick TM for your LSAT prep, you are being suckered. Testmasters is as phony as 3 dollar bill.