[2006alum]

BTW: The Daily posted a new story and it sounds like the plaintiffs' lawyer should be disbarred. He sounds like a total scuzball:

From the Daily:

Keri Fidelak, mother of Tulane undergraduate Lauren Fidelak, told The Daily she emailed lawyer John Medler on a “fact-finding mission” following the release of the initial complaint. In a later phone call that Keri said lasted approximately 10 minutes, she disclosed additional information about her daughter — some of which later appeared in the amended complaint — including her ACT scores and the colleges that rejected her. During the call, Keri said, she agreed to receive a mailed documentation on the case. 
“The whole point was that he was going to send me a packet of information and I was going to review it with my husband and my daughter and we were going to decide together what to do,” Keri said. “There has been nothing signed.”  
Lauren was unaware of her mother’s correspondence with Medler or her inclusion as a plaintiff in the case until she read The Daily’s report, at which point she notified her mother. Keri described their inclusion in the lawsuit as “a brobdingnagian invasion of privacy.” When Keri contacted Medler via email regarding the matter, he asserted in his response that she had, in fact, given him permission to include her during the phone call, but that he would remove her from the lawsuit if she wished.  
“[You] gave me the authority to file on your behalf and your daughter’s behalf,” Medler wrote in an email to Keri. “I am sorry that you have changed your mind, but it takes time to get the amendment on file.” 
Keri recalls verbally agreeing to either “move forward” or “proceed,” but did not understand this to be an agreement of her inclusion as a plaintiff in the suit.
Medler told Keri in an email that he would remove the Fidelaks from the case in a second amended complaint, but did not specify when the amended complaint would be filed.
Keri told The Daily that she may pursue legal action or file an ethics complaint for being included as a plaintiff in the lawsuit despite giving what she believes did not constitute explicit consent. 

Every lawyer worth their bar admission knows you need an engagement letter and express permission from the client before filing suit. There's no universe where a parent can verbally give consent for her (legally adult) daughter to be represented in a lawsuit.

[2006alum]

BTW: The Daily posted a new story and it sounds like the plaintiffs' lawyer should be disbarred. He sounds like a total scuzball:

From the Daily:

Keri Fidelak, mother of Tulane undergraduate Lauren Fidelak, told The Daily she emailed lawyer John Medler on a “fact-finding mission” following the release of the initial complaint. In a later phone call that Keri said lasted approximately 10 minutes, she disclosed additional information about her daughter — some of which later appeared in the amended complaint — including her ACT scores and the colleges that rejected her. During the call, Keri said, she agreed to receive a mailed documentation on the case. 
“The whole point was that he was going to send me a packet of information and I was going to review it with my husband and my daughter and we were going to decide together what to do,” Keri said. “There has been nothing signed.”  
Lauren was unaware of her mother’s correspondence with Medler or her inclusion as a plaintiff in the case until she read The Daily’s report, at which point she notified her mother. Keri described their inclusion in the lawsuit as “a brobdingnagian invasion of privacy.” When Keri contacted Medler via email regarding the matter, he asserted in his response that she had, in fact, given him permission to include her during the phone call, but that he would remove her from the lawsuit if she wished.  
“[You] gave me the authority to file on your behalf and your daughter’s behalf,” Medler wrote in an email to Keri. “I am sorry that you have changed your mind, but it takes time to get the amendment on file.” 
Keri recalls verbally agreeing to either “move forward” or “proceed,” but did not understand this to be an agreement of her inclusion as a plaintiff in the suit.
Medler told Keri in an email that he would remove the Fidelaks from the case in a second amended complaint, but did not specify when the amended complaint would be filed.
Keri told The Daily that she may pursue legal action or file an ethics complaint for being included as a plaintiff in the lawsuit despite giving what she believes did not constitute explicit consent. 

Every lawyer worth their bar admission knows you need an engagement letter and express permission from the client before filing suit. There's no universe where a parent can verbally give consent for her (legally adult) daughter to be represented in a lawsuit.