Navjeet Singh Banga, a former student of the now-defunct John F. Kennedy College of Law, has taken legal action against his alma mater after failing two classes — torts and contracts — due to alleged inadequate disability accommodations. Banga claims that the lack of specific accommodations he requested led to his failure in these courses, and subsequent dismissal from the school. The school, represented by their attorney, Vince Verde of Ogletree Deakins, disputes these claims, challenging the validity of Banga’s alleged disability according to federal law and the adequacy of the accommodations provided.
In court, as reported by Law360, Banga alleged he was given a private room to take his exams and granted twice the time given to his classmates. However, he demanded a different, less distractive room in which, he opines, he could have passed the tests had he been given. Banga further demanded similar accommodations during the ongoing lawsuit, requesting to submit his opening statement and cross-examination of the law school’s Dean Edward Barbieri in written form.
U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer allowed the written opening statement but drew the line at the request to submit the written cross-examination. When Banga alleged disenfranchisement by the law school’s trial methods, Judge Breyer sternly retorted, stating, “It’s not disenfranchising you. While I gave you some leeway because you’re a pro se litigant, you have to follow the rules of the court. This is a trial; this isn’t a game.”
His ruling brought to light the realities of court proceedings, where each side presents witnesses and the other party cross-examines them, and these processes can’t be cut short to cater to personal preferences or conveniences. Judge Breyer’s strict enforcement of court rules and procedures illustrates his commitment to maintaining the integrity and solemnity of these proceedings.
Above the Law further analyzes this case.