Talk:American Conservatory of Music/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Top of discussion

There are many factual inaccuracies in the recent edit of the article. The Orthodox Church of Belize's account of the continuation of the Conservatory stands up against academic scrutiny. Therefore, the Conservatory appears to be operating with complete continuity going back in time to its founding days in the late 19th century. The best evidence for this viability is the indisputable fact that President Emeritus Dr. Leo Heim stayed with the Conservatory until his death in early 1992, that Dr. Amelia Sligting served as Dean of the Conservatory all throughout calendar year 1992, and that Dr. Marvin Ziporyn served the Conservatory, as its Dean, from then until his death in the year 2008. Clear also, from the account, is that the Conservatory continued operating through and beyond the dates that were given for its so-called "closure." Also, the record is clear that the Conservatory has always had, and still has, a Dean, a Registrar, a Director of Admissions, and an ample number of faculty to carry on its programs. It is also evident, by its institutional continuity, that the Conservatory has complete authority, by the weight of legal precedent, to grant degrees and hold classes in the State of Illinois. It also appears that the newspaper article, that was quoted from, is also factually inaccurate because it seems to focus solely on the gossipy opinions of the defendant Board of Higher Education. Since Chairman Emeritus Richard Schulze is deceased, an encyclopedic article should not be home to such sensationalism. Accordingly, I am making modifications to the article to bring it in line with academic integrity. Park0977 (talk) 06:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

http://www.orthodoxchurch.bz/AmericanConservatory/History.html

http://www.orthodoxchurch.bz/AmericanConservatory/IllinoisLitigation.html

Accurate info is here:

http://www.ibhe.org/Media%20Center/1999/19990512_ACM.pdf

http://www.ibhe.state.il.us/Media%20Center/1999/19990128_AmeConservatoryofMusic.htm


NEWS RELEASE

from the Illinois Board of Higher Education January 28, 1999 Contact: Ross Hodel, 217/782-2551 Don Sevener, 217/782-3632

Court Bars American Conservatory of Music From Granting Degrees

SPRINGFIELD – The Illinois Board of Higher Education and Illinois Attorney General are notifying students of the American Conservatory of Music (ACM) that the institution is under court order to cease offering degrees and instruction in the state of Illinois.

A Cook County Circuit Judge has ruled that various corporations and individuals operating under the name of the American Conservatory of Music violated state laws in granting degrees without authorization from the Board of Higher Education. Circuit Judge Dorothy Kirie Kinnaird ruled that the defendants’ failure to receive IBHE authorization for its degree programs violated both the Illinois Academic Degree Act and the Private College Act. She enjoined Theodora Schulze, Richard Schulze, and Otto Schulze, who operated the American Conservatory of Music, from awarding academic degrees unless and until they have IBHE approval.

"This court order shuts down the illegal operators who have been using the American Conservatory of Music name and similar names," Kathleen Kelly, deputy director of the IBHE, said. "Students, prospective students, and other institutions should be forewarned that no one using this name has legal authority to grant degrees in Illinois."

Judge Kinnaird granted the request of the IBHE for a permanent prohibition against Conservatory Partners, LLC, which operated American Conservatory of Music, from "maintaining, operating, or establishing a post-secondary institution until the institution obtains a certificate of approval from the IBHE to establish and operate or become incorporated for the purpose of operating a post-secondary educational institution." She granted the IBHE motion to dissolve the American International Conservatory of Music as a corporation in Illinois.

The court further ordered the institution to supply a list of current students to the IBHE so they can be notified of the court's decision.

The original American Conservatory of Music closed in 1992 after a bankruptcy proceeding, and the defendants had used a series of corporate creations to grant degrees under the conservatory's name, even though they refused to seek IBHE approval to grant degrees.

"We have been puzzled and dismayed at the obstinacy of the defendants in this case," Kelly noted. "The Schultzes have had more than ample time and opportunity to comply with the requirements of the law. Many students believed the Schulzes' representations that they were issuing degrees legally. Unfortunately for students, this just was not true."

  1. # # —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.104.166.30 (talk) 10:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

"Park0997 is dishonest. American Conservaoty of Music has no federal and state accreditation. Park0997 cannot edit out the truth. American Conservaoty of Music is just using old school image to deceive people.

Here's more info on the school history. Korean students got lost when they went bankrupt.

Lawsuit Leaves Students Of Music School in Limbo Chicago Sun-Times; Feb 3, 1996; RAYMOND R. COFFEY ;

What happens now to the Korean students at Chicago's American Conservatory of Music, an upset and perplexed Ju-Yeon Seong wonders. The pianist, who holds degrees from a music college in Seoul and from the Manhattan School of Music in New York, has been a student at the conservatory here for three semesters, working for a doctorate. Last month she was informed by letter that she was being expelled on grounds that she had associated with another conservatory student/employee, Peter Boda, who also was "expelled irrevocably" for allegedly having fomented unrest among students. On Friday she learned from the Chicago Sun-Times that Illinois Attorney General James Ryan had filed a lawsuit ...

We can't trust Park0997" Preceding unsigned comment added by Masong225 (talk) 8:45, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Masong225, why are you routinely undoing my edits without any academic integrity? You must have a personal grudge against the American Conservatory of Music. Please tell us your problem with them. BTW, you say I am dishonest by my edits regarding this conservatory's accredited status; but, I never said in my edits that it has federal or state accreditation. I stated its accreditation picture with integrity. It is obvious that you are upset with them. Please tell us about your personal experience with them.Park0977 (talk) 11:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

    • Masong225, I believe that this is a good question that I would like to see the answer. On the other hand, it appears that you too, Park0977, may have a "horse in this race", so to speak. Perhaps you would be kind enough to respond to the same question? TallMagic (talk) 18:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

I am reverting the edit to my version. Please don't touch it until we are done with our discussion. Your cooperation is appreciated.Park0977 (talk) 11:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

http://www.orthodoxchurch.bz/AmericanConservatory/History.html

http://www.orthodoxchurch.bz/AmericanConservatory/IllinoisLitigation.html

38.104.166.30 reversed my edits and falsely informs the public that "Accurate info is here":

http://www.ibhe.state.il.us/Media%20Center/1999/19990128_AmeConservatoryofMusic.htm

  1. # # ?Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.104.166.30 (talk) 10:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

But, 38.104.166.30 fails to inform the public that the foregoing press announcement was released by the Defendant Illinois Board of Higher Education and that it only purportedly affects matters within the borders of the State of Illinois...and...that the court order is void and nugatory for want of subject matter jurisdiction because the Private College Act and Academic Degree Act of Illinois are not applicable to pre-1945 post-secondary educational institutions (created in Illinois). Isn't it, however, a sad testament that the State of Illinois has gone to these extreme measures to rid itself of a precious cultural resource such as the American Conservatory of Music from residency there? The current campus locations of the American Conservatory of Music are outside of Illinois (Indiana and Belize), so the above information is obiter dictum. Park0977 (talk) 07:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Next 38.104.166.30 tells us..."Do not trust Park0977" and then tells the world:

Contact NASM as I did. American Conservatory of Music is now diploma mill school - their degrees are worthless. ?Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.104.166.30 (talk) 10:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

NASM's answer was:

The American Conservatory of Music is not an accredited institutional member of the National Association of Schools of Music.

11250 Roger Bacon Drive, Suite 21Reston, VA 20190 Telephone (703) 437-0700 ext. 16 Facsimile (703) 437-6312 www.arts-accredit.org (NASM) ?Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.104.166.30 (talk) 10:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


38.104.166.30 misrepresents what I said about NASM regarding the American Conservatory of Music. 38.104.166.30, without backup of his/her allegations makes the false claim that it is "now diploma mill school". Does 38.104.166.30 have personal knowledge of this institution? If so he/she has not given any specific allegations.

In the meanwhile, I did some checking on facts:

I contacted the Registrar of the American Conservatory of Music (Dr. Mary Ellen Newsom) to inquire about recent notable graduates. The list is as follows:

  • Lieutenant Commander John R. Pastin, immediate past Music Director of the United States Navy Band, DMA in Composition and Conducting, 2005.
  • William Baker, Conductor of the William Baker Chorale, DMA in Choral Conducting, 2006.
  • Roy C. Smith, Tenor with the New York Met and the Deutsche Oper Berlin, DMA in Voice, 2006
  • Andrew Isca, past President of the Association of Concert Bands (acbands.org), DMA in Composition, 2005.
  • Anthony Williams, international Organ Soloist, Head of Department, Fisk University, Dissertation currently being published by Mellon Press, 2006.
  • Karen Pinoci, internationally acclaimed Conductor, both in Europe and America, 2007.
  • Barbara Leyden, DMA in Sacred Music Performance, Dissertation: Twenty-First Century Roman Catholic Liturgy, a Musical Synergy, 2007.
  • Marianne Vander Zanden, DMA in Composition, Dissertation and Author of the First Orthodox Oratorio of the Akathist Hymn to the Theotokos, 2007.
  • Paul Kwami, Musical Director of the world famous Fisk Jubilee Singers, DMA in Conducting, 2009.

It is obvious that none of these individuals would associate themselves with a "diploma mill". I also asked her for a list of notable faculty which will be placed in my next edit of the article.

Again, I say the record is clear from my one edit of the article that I never implied this institution is accredited by NASM. What I said was that the American Conservatory of Music is a charter founder of NASM through the efforts of Mr. John J. Hattstaedt, its founder. (The American Conservatory of Music, represented by its founder, Mr. John J. Hattstaedt, working together with five other institutions, formed the NASM in the late spring of 1924.) Source: NASM - The First Forty Years by Burnet Corwin Tuthill, Treasurer of NASM from 1924-1959) Park0977 (talk) 07:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Also, it is clear. The American Conservatory of Music is not now and never was a diploma mill. Its degrees are also valid. The Greek Orthodox Church connection is noteworthy. Park0977 (talk) 07:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Park0977 keep uploading "internationally accredited" text. Look Park0977 revised text under reorganization posted on Nov 11, 2009, Dec 9, 2009, Dec 10, 2009

This is a sheer lie. That's why I kept undoing Park0977 untruth texts.

Check ACM's accreditation status here:

http://www.ope.ed.gov/accreditation/

The answer is "There are no institutions that met your criteria."

In 2005, the US Department of Education launched www.ope.ed.gov/accreditation to combat the spread of fraudulent degrees. A number of states have passed bills restricting the ability of organisations to award degrees without accreditation.

ACM's Schulze family is infamous. Park0977 logic is based on their "bad loser" link entitled "Litigation: ACM v. Illinois Board of Higher Education."

Here's the resource of true journalism. Before relocating to the Indiana, Chicago Sun Times had reported their activity in Illinois very well. The news headlines quotations are as follows:

Conservatory con man back with new scheme Chicago Sun-Times; Mar 20, 1997; Raymond R. Coffey "Remember Richard Schulze, the amazingly elusive, big ticket, coast-to-coast con man who used to run the once-respectable American Conservatory of Music in downtown Chicago? Apparently he still runs it - but with a new address, yet another corporation (this one chartered in Las Vegas) and another pitch to shake money out of alumni, students and friends of the conservatory. This time around, Schulze is trying to raise $60,000 via a "private" shareholder offering in a "limited liability" company named Conservatory Partners LLC. To anyone familiar with his past and the current status of the conservatory, the brochure and letter promoting the pitch reads like classic con-artist poetry. In ..." http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-4375260.html

To good faith Wikipedians: Which do you trust? Con artists falsehood (from their veneer logic website) or Chicago Sun Times journalism?

Keep undoing Park0977 uploading text. Otherwise, Conservatory con man will be back with new scheme again and again. Most of Park0977 texts are "copy & paste" from ACM website.

Regarding NASM founder topic, I contacted NASM and they sent me the link: http://nasm.arts-accredit.org/site/docs/Handbook/NASM_HANDBOOK_2009-10_DEC2009.pdf

NASM official handbook makes no mention of the subject. NASM never describe the American Conservatory of Music as the founder. The original ACM was just one of the member of the early NASM. Here's the quote from the official handbook:

The National Association of Schools of Music was founded in 1924 for the purpose of securing a better understanding among institutions of higher education engaged in work in music; of establishing a more uniform method of granting credit; and of setting minimum standards for granting of degrees and other credentials. It is incorporated in the State of Ohio as a non-profit organization. The work of the Association during its early years was financed largely by the Carnegie Corporation of New York. In November of 1975, representatives of member institutions ratified proposals creating a category of membership for non-degree-granting institution.

My open questions to Park0977 are:

1. How do you relate to this unaccredited school? Did you get the worthless doctorate degree from the Indiana ACM?

2. If you kept insisting ACM worthless degrees as "internationally accredited," Which accreditation organization are you refereing to? Show us the link here.

3. The uploaded "notable graduates" are not notable. But some of them are not American. How did the foreigners get the international student VISA from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)? The government office of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) never issue any foreign student F-1 VISA to the unaccredited school that awards academic degrees and diplomas with substandard or no academic study and without recognition by official educational accrediting bodies.

P.S. Contact BBB & Consumer Affairs if you received the worthless academic degrees from the Indiana ACM believing the awarded highest degrees are valid. Usually, the highest degree purchasers are liable to claim to hold an academic degree, and the organization is motivated by making a profit. These degrees are often awarded based on vaguely construed life experience. Some such organizations claim accreditation by non-recognized/unapproved accrediting bodies set up for the purposes of providing a veneer of authenticity.

I am not going to undo the recent revision by Orlady - nice work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Masong225 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Unsigned and unsupported section

Bankruptcy

For accurate information on school, you must read:

http://www.ibhe.org/Media%20Center/1999/19990512_ACM.pdf

http://www.ibhe.state.il.us/Media%20Center/1999/19990128_AmeConservatoryofMusic.htm

American Conservatory of Music in Indiana is far from the original school of Illinois in old days. ACM is NOT accredited with NASM and The Commission on Proprietary Education of Indiana, COPE.

For accuarte information on their unaccredited status:

http://www.in.gov/cope/ http://nasm.arts-accredit.org/

Park0997 writing is not academic. Are you a member of this slippery school? Your writing is based on their homepage information which is not reliable. Get out of here.

For accuarte information on their unaccredited status:

http://www.in.gov/cope/ http://nasm.arts-accredit.org/


The American Conservatory of Music is not accredited in the Indiana State (COPE The Indiana Commission on Proprietary Education ): NO STATE ACCREDITATION http://www.in.gov/cpe/2337.htm

Surpirsingly, the American Conservatory of Music is not accredited by National Association of Schools of Music: NO FEDERAL ACCREDITATION


This notoriously-unreliable school can be regarded as diploma mill. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kessel26 (talk • contribs) 04:05, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Article by the Orthodox Church of Belize regarding "Bankruptcy"

The please see Orthodox Church in Belize ACM History for more information concerning the bankruptcy.

You might want to modify what you added, since it's pretty much just copied verbatim from a copyrighted page. If you could just paraphrase a little more, it won't get deleted by The Powers That Be around here.--BillFlis 00:04, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Unsigned and unsupported allegation

The original ACM went bankrupt in 1992 [1], but some people evidently have continued to use the name [2].

Valid comments by other editors

The Orthodox Church page is intriguing, mentioning "criminal mismanagement", makes one wonder what happened there. This page is interesting!--BillFlis 12:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

You probably need to do more revising of this site. It speaks too much from the author's point of view, and is not objectively voiced enough for encyclopedia quality. Also there may be an error regarding the "Noted faculty". Nadia Boulanger taught at the American Conservatory at Fontainebleau, which I don't believe is the same as the old Chicago school.Grinder22 17:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Opportunities for Improving the Article

I think that this article offers opportunities for improving adherance to wp:NPOV. I really appreciate the efforts put into this article by all involved parties, so far. My view is that the Wikipedia policies and guidelines do amazingly well at improving articles, when those policies and guidelines are adhered to. This is especially true when we have multiple people holding opposing views. I think that we have this situation in this case. Regards, TallMagic (talk) 18:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Claim by ACM that their name is being used illegally

There's a statement here [3] that a fellow that apparently runs a substandard music school is nefariously (the claim is "illegally") using the name American Conservatory of Music. The current Wikipedia article seems to be based almost exclusively on selfpublished sources from a different websight claiming to be the reconstituted ACM. This appears very strange to me. Can someone please correct me if I'm misunderstanding or just explain what this is about? Thanks, TallMagic (talk) 18:19, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

apparent POV vandalism

The infobox has been recently altered to represent the school as still existing. This seems to be in contradiction of the referenced material. I've reverted it. The NPOV tag is however appropriate, and I've restored it. I reorganized the material in the proper historical sequence. I suggest the following resolution: split the article by date , American Conservatory of Music 1985-1991 and American Conservatory of Music 1992- . this will at least isolate the controversial material.

About primary sources:. Court decisions are often in need of interpretation, and their needs to be supported by secondary sources. The Chicago Tribune article serve as such sources. It would be valuable to have some from magazines or other materials in the field of music as well. DGG ( talk ) 19:43, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

article flagged appropriately

I contend that the edits performed by Eurodog have displayed a bias in favor of a point of view. This makes the article unbalanced and totally inappropriate for the guidelines expressed by WP:NPOV. It is interesting that these edits began on the tenth anniversary of the tragic events of 9-11-2001 in New York City. The board chairman of the Illinois entity is on public record as having given his approval to the continuation of the American Conservatory of Music. See John Richard von Rhein (born 1945), Changing The Score, American Conservatory Gets Another Chance. Other facts reported in that same article give credence to the facts that support the notion that there has been a continuos operation of the American Conservatory of Music up to the present. See Illinois Litigation - 1996 to Present. I think the infobox should be changed now to reflect the benefit of the doubt, and I think the article should be changed to reflect a factual encyclopedic format.Rheesmusic (talk) 21:38, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Undid tag removal by Orlady because the article is fictitious

Because of WP:NPOV guidelines, I undid the tag removal done by Orlady, because the article is fictitious as regards to the purported closure of the American Conservatory of Music in 1991. It is clear from reliable sources that the American Conservatory of Music never closed its doors, but that it was rescued from the threat of closure in mid-1991. The State of Illinois appears to have fabricated its closure theory in order to defend a court case prosecuted by the Conservatory, since 19th century educational institutions are not subject to the Illinois Private College Act or the Illinois Academic Degree Act. It appears that any existing court orders are voidable because Illinois' answer to the Conservatory's complaint for declaratory relief appear from the facts to be spurious. Park0977 (talk) 05:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Template:Fiction is inappropriate for content disputes regarding real-world topics. It is for articles about works of fiction; it references Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction. I have removed the fiction template once again. --Orlady (talk) 04:08, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
and I have removed some material that was not supported by citations, and appeared to be pure promotion of the organization claiming to have continued the school. I would regard any reinsertion, as vandalism, and will take action accordingly. To the extent there is a genuine dispute, the text of the article expresses it adequate--though some further adjustment is needed in the last paragraph. I am not going to attempt to determine the matter, except to say that where there is a determination by a court, that decision is given as the NPOV state of things. DGG ( talk ) 04:58, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
and I respectfully disagree with your treatment of this article. It is well settled that when a court's judgment is tainted by spurious allegations and extrinsic fraud on the court, (in other words an attorney files a complaint and/or pleadings containing purposeful falsehoods), then that court's order is void, and is a nullity, having no force or effect. The historical factual record demonstrates that the new management of the American Conservatory of Music educational institution successfully perpetuated and continued the American Conservatory of Music, founded in 1886, in mid-1991. Indeed, if you want to go by a court order, then I think In re: Hagan's Will is appropriate since Illinois courts accept its validity. It is certainly arguable that the Attorneys representing the State of Illinois either knew or should have known about the historical record regarding the mid-1991 rescue of the American Conservatory of Music educational institution and that they were required to make a good faith inquiry into how this historical record would be interpreted by existing judicial precedent. (Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct) Under WP:NPOV, the court orders lack factual integrity and must therefore be discounted, since the main purpose of an encyclopedia is to accurately report the historical record of past events taking into account judicial precedent in any controversies between the parties as applied to its operations in the legal jurisdictions which grant it legal approval to operate. With respect to the operations of the Conservatory institution outside the State of Illinois, Illinois court orders and the application of Illinois law are not controlling. The historical record demonstrates that the American Conservatory of Music had a Summer 1991 semester, a Fall 1991 semester, a Spring 1992 semester, etc. with the same national accreditation (NASM), with the same faculty, with the same students, with the same educational facilities, and in the same premises using the same address. NASM accreditation was held until the late 1990's. The Conservatory did not close, period. It is an ongoing educational institution and should be represented as such. Park0977 (talk) 12:00, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Yes, you've repeated your assertions. But it is well settled that the decision of a court is accepted until it has been reversed by some higher court. this is not the place for propaganda or soapboxing, or promotions of your own views about why the courts are doing things wrongly. This is not the place to settle legal disputes; we just report them. What is actually needed is some references for the existence of the Illinois institution. I've marked another place where there are some references needed, and removed one section which seems peripheral and difficult to source. NPOV means exactly the opposite of what you think it does: it means we report the different positions as supported by evidence, not that we right wrongs. Are you asserting the Illinois institution is ongoing? what is your evidence for it? Or are you claiming it is ongoing in Indiana? Again, some evidence for that is needed also. You claim that one or both of these institutions under some name has current accreditation. Which of them, under what name, and what's the evidence? WIf there's any, we can work on some of the details. DGG ( talk ) 00:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Illinois courts have ruled, regarding this matter in the following manner:
"A decision by an agency which lacks the statutory power to enter the decision is treated the same as a decision by an agency which lacks personal or subject matter jurisdiction-the decisions are void. Business & Professional People for the Public Interest, 136 Ill.2d at 244, 144 Ill.Dec. 334, 555 N.E.2d at 717. A void order is a complete nullity from its inception and has no legal effect. Siddens v. Industrial Comm'n, 304 Ill.App.3d 506, 511, 238 Ill.Dec. 205, 711 N.E.2d 18, 21 (1999)." Gilchrist v. Human Rights Commission, 728 N.E.2d 566.
The attorneys representing the state, by misrepresenting the status of the Conservatory as closed, (when in fact such Conservatory did not close, as evidenced by independent news accounts, the continuing accreditation, the continuing Title IV participation), gave the court, merely, a specious jurisdiction (which is no jurisdiction at all per Gilchrist), because the Court has no power to grant relief pursuant to the higher education statutes in relation to pre-1945 educational institutions. Thus, the court's orders against the Conservatory are void ab initio. Void court orders do not deserve the full faith and credit of Wikipedia under the terms of WP:verifiability and they cannot be used to support the article's misrepresentation of the historical record that are not supported by reliable sources quoted above. Rheesmusic (talk) 08:09, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Deleting other editors edition twice in 1 hour without verification action

Eurodog, The abusive and egoistic action of Orlady, an Administrator of Wikipedia frightens people like me. The dispute here is that the ACM is in operation, in Belize Central America and USA. The article is misleading and extremely biased. (Ewater58 (talk) 06:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC))

Sources

A statement was made on my talk page that there were many sources covering ACM that were not utilized in the article. I came to this discussion page assuming that links to these sources had already been posted. Apparently that is not the case. Or perhaps I'm missing the information in the history? If someone has that information I'd appreciate the sources being posted. Note, I'm just interested in links to the articles being provided not the text from the articles.) Thanks, TallMagic (talk) 04:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

See User talk:Masong225 for part of the list. It's a long and complicated saga, and the various articles contain far more minor details and sidebars than would ever be included in an article. I've skimmed many of the articles (and found more in my own web searches), but I have not carved out nearly enough time to try to assemble a coherent story -- and I think that there are some critical "holes" that cannot be filled in from online sources. --Orlady (talk) 05:30, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

The American Conservatory of Music never closed

Ewater wrote: The truth is that the American Conservatory of Music never closed and is still in operation. That is why this article is so biased and not true. We are not the judge. I am only an observer based on the fact that the Conservatory is still in operation. Whether it is legal in Belize or in Chicago, it is not for me to judge. My edition is reporting the current facts/situation of the Conservatory. Please give the Conservatory a call and find out their situation yourself.
Belize Campus Santa Elena
(501) 824-2382
16 Maxi Street
Santa Elena, Belize Central America
Chicago Campus
(219) 931-6000
252 Wildwood Road
Hammond, Indiana 46324
(Ewater58 (talk) 04:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC))
Eurodog wrote: Everyone who has worked on this article thoroughly understands that an entity by the same name, but incorporated in Indiana, operates in Hammond. The State of Indiana, however, has barred that entity from "[M]aintaining, operating, or establishing a post-secondary institution until the institution obtains a certificate of approval from the Indiana Board of Higher Education." In lieu of seeking a certificate, the Hammond entity filed paperwork with the State of Indiana, representing itself as an ecclesiastical operation that does not award degrees leading to a profession in music. There is no bias with respect to the rulings and adjudications of the States of Illinois and Indiana and the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. Multiple authors from major media, mostly the Chicago Tribune, have published articles that merely reflect those legal rulings/decisions.
Rheesmusic wrote: Eurodog, if the entity "by the same name, but incorporated in Indiana" were operating illegally in Indiana as post-secondary institution, it would have been long ago closed. Several years have elapsed since your stale data. It is not clear that this source you quote can be used to establish a purported factual conclusion as to the question of ACM's operations in Indiana. So, your argument lacks merit. As to the Illinois matter, institutional continuity has been proved by independent press corroboration of that fact. Because that is true, your attempt to defend ab initio void orders of an Illinois court is a nullity, since you have been long apprised of why and how Illinois legal precedent supports the American Conservatory of Music's legal position. And, it is not up to debate: an ab initio void oder is a legal nullity, of none effect! Revert the article to Ewater58's edits now. Rheesmusic (talk) 14:21, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Eurodog wrote: Friends of the new entity obviously see it as a reorganization and continuation of the old entity. But there is no legal standing for this argument, which leaves wikipedia editors with no choice in the matter. There are legions of prolific wikipedia editors who work hard to improve articles about music. Most are neutral about who's who in this matter, and many would love say that the new entity is nothing more than a heroic reorganization. The beauty of wikipedia is that, in most cases, peers give plenty of latitude to editors. Ultimately tho', the strength of edits rests on reliable third party sources and documented legal structure. Eurodog 06:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Rheesmusic wrote: Eurodog, your arguments are not on point. Rheesmusic (talk) 14:21, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Eurodog wrote: Staying on points
  • The first point is whether the Indiana ACM is lawfully granting degrees in music. The answer is "yes." Ergo, the article (in the section about the Hammond ACM) should reflect this fact. The Indiana Commission on Proprietary Education (COPE) exempted programs offered by ACM from regulation because it is a religious institution that is protected under the Constitution of Indiana and the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. As a religious institution, the State of Indiana does not forbid ACM from offering degrees of any stripe. (re: Letter from the Indiana Commission on Proprietary Education, by David Reynolds (interim commissioner) to Otto Schultz, January 7, 2008) Eurodog 22:44, 27 February 2012‎ (UTC)
  • The second point is whether the Indiana ACM is a lawful reorganization of the bankrupt ACM, formerly of Chicago. According to multiple authorities under the State of Illinois the answer is "no." According to Federal Bankruptcy Court, the answer is "no." According to the Board of Directors and CEO at the time of liquidation in 1991, the answer is "no." According to several editors from the Chicago Tribune, the answer is "no." According to the ACM website located in Hammond (and several editors, herein) the answer is "yes." From the perspectives of entity types and geography, the ecclesiastical ACM incorporated in Indiana bears little resemblance to the historic ACM formerly incorporated in Illinois. From the perspective of accreditations, none from the historic ACM survived. The State of Indiana does not take a position on the matter. Eurodog 22:44, 27 February 2012‎ (UTC)
Rheesmusic wrote: Not so fast...The answer to this point is "yes" (answered from verifiable sources cited by User:Park0977 above). The important factual record in this matter of ACM's continuation is that as an educational institution, ACM continued and was successfully rescued by the new management in mid-1991, as reported by John von Rhein on July 28, 1991 in the Chicago Tribune feature article of that date. The Conservatory did not close, as evidenced by subsequent independent news accounts as documented above by User:Park0977, its continuing educational programs utilizing the same educational facilities that it had always used before 1991, with the same students and the same Dean and faculty, the continuing NASM accreditation which lasted until the late 1990s, its continuing Federal Title IV participation through the mid-1990s, and the fact that it was the first to attack the State of Illinois in Court regarding the Grandfathering provisions. With this factual record being applied to "In re: Hagan's Will", 234 Iowa 1001, 14 N.W.2d 638, ACM had not ceased to exist as an educational institution. "Nor, under the circumstances here, has Penn College" (or ACM) "ceased to exist as an educational institution merely because a distinct corporation has taken over the legal title and business management of the college. Indeed the very purpose of effecting a nominal change in ownership and operation was to insure the continued existence of the institution of learning. We think such purpose has succeeded up to this time." In re: Hagan's Will", 234 Iowa 1001, 14 N.W.2d 638. Illinois Courts have had a series of decisions: In Re Fuller's Estate, 294 N.E.2d 313, and In Re Estate of Trimmer, 330 N.E.2d 241, that quoted in agreement and approval to the Hagan case here and here-above cited. Illinois courts are bound, therefore by the principles of stare decisis to follow that precedent, and the Illinois Attorneys representing the Board of Higher Education either knew or should have known about this precedent, being charged to uphold the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct. These attorneys, in representing the state, and by misrepresenting the status of the Conservatory as closed, when, in fact, they either knew or should have known that such Conservatory did not close, perpetrated a fraud upon the court depriving it of jurisdiction. Also, because the ACM had not ceased to exist as an educational institution, the State of Illinois had no jurisdiction to apply the Private College Act or the Academic Degree Act to a pre-1945 educational institution such as ACM per Eisele v. Ayers, App. 1 Dist.1978, 21 Ill.Dec. 86. As I said before:
Illinois courts have ruled, regarding this matter in the following manner:
"A decision by an agency which lacks the statutory power to enter the decision is treated the same as a decision by an agency which lacks personal or subject matter jurisdiction-the decisions are void. Business & Professional People for the Public Interest, 136 Ill.2d at 244, 144 Ill.Dec. 334, 555 N.E.2d at 717. A void order is a complete nullity from its inception and has no legal effect. Siddens v. Industrial Comm'n, 304 Ill.App.3d 506, 511, 238 Ill.Dec. 205, 711 N.E.2d 18, 21 (1999)." Gilchrist v. Human Rights Commission, 728 N.E.2d 566.
The attorneys representing the state, by misrepresenting the status of the Conservatory as closed, (when in fact such Conservatory did not close, as evidenced by independent news accounts, the continuing accreditation, the continuing Title IV participation), gave the court, merely, a specious jurisdiction (which is no jurisdiction at all per Gilchrist), because the Court has no power to grant relief pursuant to the higher education statutes in relation to pre-1945 educational institutions. Thus, the court's orders against the Conservatory are void ab initio. Void court orders do not deserve the full faith and credit of Wikipedia under the terms of WP:Verifiability and they cannot be used to support the article's misrepresentation of the historical record that are not supported by reliable sources as quoted above. Rheesmusic (talk) 22:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Eurodog wrote: For wikipedia editors operating at an arm's length – governmental entities with jurisdiction and regulatory authority should carry the water on this matter.
Rheesmusic wrote: Normally yes, except for the State of Illinois, whose void actions, per Guilchrist cited above, nullify their attempted jurisdiction over ACM and there is consequently no regulatory authority to be exercised over ACM in this matter. Rheesmusic (talk) 22:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Eurodog wrote: New point to editors of differing views: Let's refrain from calling people names. Orlady has contributed selflessly and immeasurably to wikipedia and has earned praise by her peers. My guess is that most wikipedia administrators are deaf & blind to name-calling. My guess is that a disagreement with an administrator might register if done with an air of respect and supporting third party citations. The comments of X00001223, tho unregistered and unsigned, might seem suspicious. But, it did not meet criteria for a vandalism or sockpuppetry. The comments seem like a reiteration of underlying salient facts important to him or her.
  • Proposal: Rather than seesawing back and forth over whether the new ACM is a seamless continuation of the old, why not add a new article for the new ACM — a strong one that highlights its accomplishments? The article could mention the impetus for its founding and its never-dying conviction that — despite corporate, legal, and regulatory history — it is, in the eyes of proponents, a reorganization of the bankrupt institution. The new article would allow editors to chronicle positive virtues of the new institution. The new article would also sidestep routine reversals from editors and administrators upholding the original ACM article. The new article would most certainly pass the notability litmus test. — Eurodog 22:44, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Ewater58 wrote: Eurodog, I am not a US citizen and do not live in USA. I am not familiar with laws of your courts. What I observed is that, as a parable, the head of the musical family is broke, he committed suicide. The liquidator came in and took all the family possessions. The rest of the family has retained all the traditional musical skills and continued the family business originally began by their great great grandfather 120 years ago, with the same name originally called by their great great grandfather, which is a music school. The State government stopped them saying that is not allowed unless the family business use 'modern musical' skills and to be dictated by the authority. The traditional musical family put up a fight with the authority. Please correct me if I am wrong. (This could be the biggest musical joke from USA). (Ewater58 (talk) 23:07, 27 February 2012 (UTC))
Eurodog wrote: Ewater58, Hong Kong has sophisticated business and education laws and regs, not too dissimilar from those of the U.S. I do not relish offering an opinion, but will in this instance. The authorities and accrediting agencies of the States of Illinois and Indiana, as well as those of the country as a whole, oversee world-renowned music institutions of higher learning under every conceivable pedagogical model — conservatory, academic, vocational, teacher training, and a mix of any and all. There are too many to name, but in Illinois, there's Northwestern University Bienen School of Music and in Indiana, there's Indiana University Jacobs School of Music. Both states have long histories of overseeing quality learning in music at vocational and academic levels. No one is standing in the way of a generational hand-down approach to music education championed by ACM's founder. The States of Illinois and Indiana do not dictate how music should be taught, but rather, from a consumer protection standpoint (among other things), they require a comprehensive minimum core and a demonstrable level of competency, especially when substantial money is exchanged. Not to do so would be a big joke. For what it's worth, I am confident that ACM, in its day, would have no trouble satisfying accreditation from any state agency or national association. Higher education in the U.S. is fraught with fraud and charlatans. The "traditional music family" is an interesting metaphor because the current ACM is led almost exclusively by a family – albeit one that is devoted to multiple worthy causes. The historic AMC was not a family, but a collegial and diverse faculty of scholars, performing artist, vocational teachers, and administrators. Some alumni might see some wisdom in accepting a legal end to a great institution and era. As a parable to the benefit of full liquidation of bankruptcy, the estates of big band leaders often forbid ghost bands to live on under their names for fear of deterioration of hard-earned reputations. — Eurodog 01:34, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
P.S. I just fully re-read the older discussions in this section. No one with first-hand knowledge about the Hammond entity had ever bothered to cite evidence that it was free to offer degrees in music as a religious institution (with no regulatory oversight). Citing this evidence would have averted frustration expressed ad nauseam. Many comments, old and new, contain fruitless trash-talk.
Going forward, we should (i) tighten-up this article as a bygone institution and (ii) perhaps add an article about the new ACM in Hammond. And, regardless of whether anyone is personally affiliated with any aspect of this subject, we should all vow to proceed in an objective and collegial manner – lite on opinion and heavy on cited facts from well-established third party sources.
Knowing what we now know, I propose removing both tags — COI & POV, which were both inserted by veteran administrator DGG (19 Sept 2011), who stepped-in to quell a flurry of unsupported edits. — Eurodog 18:14, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Rheesmusic wrote: Objection, the tags must stay where they are until you change the article to reflect our discussion regarding point 2, the reply for which must be "yes", realizing that ACM is a rescued educational institution in continuous operation since its inception in 1886. Rheesmusic (talk) 22:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Eurodog wrote: Rheesmusic, I understand your objection. My sense is that the tags would be apropos if they reflected dissension backed by known third party published references rather than hard-fought opinions. Before commenting further, let's invite the views of others. — Eurodog 22:54, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Ewater58: Eurodog and Orlady, did you work in the US legal system? Or are you still part of the system? Please advise how the 'family' of ACM - The Friends - use their traditional family skill - teaching music and continued with the name ACM which their great great grandfather started in 1886. Some of your comment appeared in the article and above showed you may have something against ACM in Chicago (consciously or unconsciously) and want to evilized The Friends of ACM or wipe off the USA heritage.(Ewater58 (talk) 01:20, 5 March 2012 (UTC))

Demand to remove all misrepresentations about the American Conservatory of Music and to undo a split of the article

Rheesmusic wrote: Eurodog, the tags are apropos because they reflect dissension backed by known third party published references (West Publishing Company, Chicago Tribune, and Chicago Sun Times). I see where you have taken precipitate action and not waited for a consensus of opinion before dividing the article into an old institution vs. new institution scenario. Please undo all that and change the main article to remove all misrepresentations about ACM.) It is a valid fact in accordance with WP:Verifiability that ACM is a cohesive unified educational institution since 1886 and has never closed. Rheesmusic (talk) 00:48, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Eurodog wrote, Rheesmusic, I am happy to merge the two articles back. But doing so will limit the ability to build the post-1992 story because no one has produced reliable third party references refuting the opinions and rulings of the Illinois State Attorney General, the Illinois State Courts, the Illinois Board of Higher Education, and U.S. Bankruptcy Court – who all say that there is no connection between the entities. — Eurodog 05:41, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Rheesmusic wrote, Eurodog, for the time being, until this matter is cleared up, I agree with your assessment that it is wise to go with your decision to separate the articles. Will you now study and consider the WP:Primary contributed in my reply to your point 2? Also, you might find out what Illinois Courts have to say about ab initio void court orders. Are such not considered a legal nullity, of no force or effect? We have considered the factual evidence regarding the continuity of ACM's operations through 1991 and beyond. All of us agree that NASM's accreditation continued with ACM until the late 1990s, several years after and beyond the purported closure year of 1991. This fact is prima facie evidence that NASM recognized, during the period of its accreditation of ACM, the institutional continuity of the rescued ACM, still referring to it as a charter member in its membership directories. published from 1991 to 1998. Rheesmusic (talk) 07:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Eurodog to Rheesmusic: NASM does not provide a reason for delisting ACM's membership on May 1, 1998. Failing to delist earlier does not translate into an endorsement. Accreditation by NASM is a bureaucracy administered by academicians who are elected by peers who, like kings on a chessboard, move slow but with powerful deliberation. Conceivably, NASM could have simply been waiting for the dust to settle. – Eurodog 04:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Orlady wrote: I have no personal knowledge of these schools nor of any coordinated effort to discredit the Hammond/Belize school. I have tried only to apply Wikipedia policy and interpret information derived from reliable sources.
In the multi-year history of contention over this article, I have yet to see any third-party reliably sourced indication that the Hammond/Belize school is truly the successor to the historical ACM. Indeed, about all that I know for sure about the Hammond/Belize school comes from solid documentation (much of it admittedly from court documents, which are WP:Primary sources) to the effect that it is not a successor to the true ACM and/or is operating illegally in Indiana. (This 96-page compendium on the Indiana state website contains much of the documentation.) The websites of the school and its ecclesiastical sponsor in Belize are not independent sources, and the personal testimony of individual Wikipedians is not a basis for verifiability. --Orlady (talk) 03:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Rheesmusic wrote, Orlady, are you contending that the State of Indiana has ignored its obligations and failed to stop the operations of what you referred to above as an "illegal school", and that they should have acted long before now? Judge not, lest you be judged! Eurodog has indicated in his research that ACM is operating legally in the State of Indiana pursuant to an exemption granted/renewed in 2008 by COPE. Note: the document you refer to, on Page 27 acknowledges ACM's religious exemption in the year 2002 in a communication by Phillip Roush, the then Commissioner of COPE. Certainly, it cannot be said that Eurodog has been an advocate of the notion that ACM was operating legally in Indiana, but when I pointed out that Indiana's obligation to the public is not to tolerate any illegalities, Eurodog checked with the Indiana COPE agency and learned of the ACM's renewed religious exemption in the beginning of 2008. Eurodog's representation of this fact on this talk page is enough to satisfy Wikipedia guidelines of WP:Verifiability, especially because of his/her advocacy of points of view, contrary to mine and others who have posted in support of an advocacy for ACM's public representations on its associated web sites. Rheesmusic (talk) 07:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Rheesmusic wrote: What part of In re: Hagan's Will don't you understand? ACM of Hammond is identical to the educational institution established in 1886. It appears that you resist, confronted with the situation in which it is, through WP:Primary demonstrable, the notion that the ACM in Hammond is the legitimate continuation of the educational institution that was formed in the year 1886. Can you legitimately deny the sources I pulled from West Publishing Company? It seems to me that as a Wikipedia Administrator, you have an obligation to check out the quotations I made from In re: Hagan's Will, 234 Iowa 1001, before you make a quick judgment that agrees with a biased State agency bent on covering up what it knew to be the facts so it could trick the Illinois Court into thinking it had jurisdiction over ACM, when, in fact, it did not according to West Publishing Company publications and Illinois judicial case authority established by operation of Illinois' appellate court jurisdiction. Rheesmusic (talk) 07:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Orlady to Rheesmusic: Wikipedia is not a court of law, and it does not publish Wikipedia contributors' personal interpretations of legal opinions (see WP:OR and particularly WP:PRIMARY). I am not personally familiar with Hagan or his/her will, and that doesn't matter because neither your legal research nor mine is going to be the basis for an article. The first page of the state of Indiana compendium does provide the state's finding that "The current ownership took control of the remaining assets of the corporation, including the ACM name" in 1991, so at least one government entity thinks that the current ACM is the legal successor to the ACM (this is not the conclusion I would have drawn from some of the other court papers that appear to indicate that the current ACM had no valid legal claim to legal successorship or to the name). Regardless, controlling a school's remaining assets and its name does not make it the same school, which likely explains why the current operators were issued "cease and desist" orders, jailed for contempt of court, etc. --Orlady (talk) 18:04, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Orlady wrote: In view of the lack of third-party published coverage, it is my opinion that the Hammond/Belize school is not notable by Wikipedia standards. Accordingly, it should not be the subject of its own separate article; thus, American Conservatory of Music (Hammond, Indiana & Belize) should be merged back into this article. --Orlady (talk) 03:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Rheesmusic responding to Orlady: You are entitled to your opinion, but as a Wikipedian, you would not, of course, let those opinions color your duty as an Administrator. Your job now, I am sure you are aware, is to verify the sources that have been presented. Once you have done so, the article must be changed to reflect the fact that ACM did not close in 1991, and never closed. Rheesmusic (talk) 07:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Orlady to Rheesmusic: WP:Notability is not a matter of personal opinion -- not mine and not yours. According to the general notability guideline (see linked page for more details), "if a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." Additionally, WP:ORG states "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. All content must be verifiable. If no independent, third-party, reliable sources can be found on a topic, then Wikipedia should not have an article on it." I have yet to see any evidence that the entity in Hammond, Indiana, has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Accordingly, I conclude that it does not merit an article. --Orlady (talk) 18:04, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Eurodog to Rheesmusic ("the document," clarification & reiteration): There is no official document online showing that the Indiana ACM is exempt from regulation. But the document does exist and was first cited by me on January 27, 2012 (the day I discovered it). Exemption from regulation, by default, gives ACM the freedom to offer any degree it chooses under the auspices of religious freedom. Not knowing that the document existed has been the cause of needless and wrong perceptions about the Indiana ACM for four years. The document is in the form of a simple letter that serves more as a waiver from regulation. The letter is from the Indiana Commission on Proprietary Education – by David Reynolds, then the Interim Commissioner – to Otto Schultz, dated January 7, 2008. Older discussions, here, wrongly assumed that, because COPE (or CPE) had not accredited ACM, its course offerings and degree granting were unlawful. Orlady correctly stated that wikipedia editors should not make legal interpretations, but one might infer that the COPE letter is retroactive to the date when ACM moved to and incorporated in Indiana in 1998. Incidentally, unless repealed, Indiana House Bill 1270 abolishes COPE (CPE), effective July 1, 2012.
From the standpoint of the State of Illinois and the US Bankruptcy Court, there is no misunderstanding that ACM operated unlawfully from 1992 to 1998 when is was domiciled in Illinois.
Verifying sources that have been presented: I'm getting tangled up in my underwear over what's what. Rheesmusic, could you list below, as bullet points, the specific sources you want Orlady (and others) to verify? The sources should be reputable third party published and citable references; not legal interpretations that administrator DGG once rejected. It would help if you listed them in two categories:
(1) Sources that support your contention that the new ACM is a legal and/or widely perceived resurrection of the old. If your response relies on a perceived absence of any ruling that prohibits the Schulzes from claiming the resurrection, then explain the basis that you are relying upon. And, explain how the claim can usurp decisions that are contrary to the Federal Bankruptcy Court, Illinois regularity agencies, Attorney General, State Courts, and the ACM Board of Directors of 1991. Anyone anywhere can start an ACM. But, claiming ownership to the bankrupt ACM would require an "okay" from authorities that oversaw it. Hagan's will notwithstanding, U.S. bankruptcy trumps all other proceedings from any state. If any assets were passed on without the knowledge of the Bankruptcy Court, those assets are legally part of the bankruptcy estate, forever, without any limitation of time. The only way the new ACM could legally own an asset (tangible or intangible) — that was once owned by the old ACM — is for that asset to be exempted in the bankruptcy proceedings — even if the asset has little or no monetary value. This concept would include any assets transferred up to a year prior to the bankruptcy (the "look-back period"). Put another way, the new ACM might well possess items from the old ACM (like student records, library collection, etc.), but that doesn't mean that it lawfully owns them, unless, as stated in the prior sentence, they were exempted by the bankruptcy judge.
March 2, 2012, Eurodog Amends the prior two sentences that say the only way the new ACM could own an asset from the old is if the bankruptcy decreed it — In 1991 or 1992, Schulze made a deal with the landlord to take over ACM's old space. The landlord was a major secured creditor; and as such, may have taken possession of some of ACM's physical assets. Schulze operated out of that space for some time. I've seen paperwork somewhere indicating that the State of Illinois took ACM's archived records. I'm not sure who holds the records for the students who were enrolled in 1991. The 1991 Board had made provisions for students to transfer and made other means to protect their records. Tho', records of those who stayed were altered, according to court documents. — Eurodog 18:45, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
(2) Sources that support notability of the ACM now in existence. These sources might include a list of current faculty and post-1992 alumni. If the notable faculty are few, then other editors might aver that bios would be more apropos. As an editor of fine arts matters, I likely will side with anyone in defense of a person who has devoted their life to music education in institutions of higher learning. — Eurodog 18:38, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Follow-up to Rheesmusic by Eurodog:
  • If you’re relying on the 1944 Iowa case, The Will of Lottie R. Hagan v. Penn College (and it's successor, William Penn College) and Drake University – that case involved the survivorship (or succession) of Hagan's bequest to two colleges with a specific stipulation should one fail. Drake asserted that Penn College ceased to exist and, therefore, should get all of the money; while William Penn College (the new entity) claimed that it had taken over ownership of Penn College. I'm no lawyer, but pretending for a moment that wikipedia editors are allowed to interpret case law, this does not look germane to ACM because ACM went thru a full liquidation bankruptcy, which, under Chapter 7, very precisely terminates the life of a corporation. If there are any allusions that the old ACM lawfully transferred assets (or even its name) to the new ACM, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court would have full jurisdiction over the transfer of anything — assets, worthless things, and even bequests to or from ACM. In bankruptcy, all assets belong to the bankruptcy estate by default, unless specifically exempted by the judge, including undeclared, concealed, or transferred assets. Like the two Indiana cases cited, the Hagan case is moot because ACM — whether ACM presented it to a judge in a court of law — does not appear to have ever won a decree specific to this argument.
  • If you're relying on the 1973 Illinois Appellate Court case, The Estate of Barbara Ammott Fuller v. three hospitals, the dispute was over the treatment of Fuller’s bequest to the three hospitals. This case essentially became a “who is who” after one of the hospitals merged with a fourth hospital and changed its identity. This is completely different from ACM’s case, because, in a merger, the assets are never liquidated.
  • If you're relying on the 1975 Illinois Appellate Court case, The Estate of Ivy J. Trimmer and two hospitals v. three churches in Lexington, Illinois, Trimmer’s bequest named three churches and two hospitals, but stipulated that if any of the churches dissolved or changed affiliation, its portion would go to a school district in Lexington. Two of the churches merged, and in doing so, one dissolved. One of the disputes related to whether the dissolution wiped-out eligibility for the bequest or whether the merger preserved the eligibility intended for the two churches. One striking point that disconnects this case from ACM — the church dissolution occurred for the purpose of the merger; whereas ACM’s dissolution occurred to completely liquidate itself in the face of creditors. ACM’s 1991 directors exhibited no intent to do a hand-off to the Schulzes. Whereas, the church parishioners fully intended a hand-off – by way of merger. — Eurodog 21:26, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
  • If you are relying on 1989 Supreme Court case, Business & Professional People for the Public Interest et al. v. Illinois Commerce Commission, et. al — the Supreme Court overturned an order for a utility rate increase based, among other things, on a lack of authority by the Commission (and other state agencies). Some may see it as a plausible allegory, but ACM never won this sort of argument in an Illinois court, rendering the argument moot. — Eurodog 21:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for Eurodog, Rheesmusic and Orlady

Eurodog, Rheesmusic and Orlady, as said above. The ACM is really part of your (I suppose all 3 of you are USA citizens) musical heritage, a brilliant one. As Eurodog has suggested, rewrite the ACM history with the understanding that the 'family' has continued the old family musical business teaching traditional musical skills at Belize and Hammond, Indiana. (Ewater58 (talk) 23:27, 27 February 2012 (UTC))

Orlady, with the discussion so far, please consider amend the first paragraph as I have proposed.(Ewater58 (talk) 01:04, 6 March 2012 (UTC))

The American Conservatory of Music is a school of music based in Belize (formerly British Honduras) in Central America, with campus in Hammond, Indiana of USA, under the management of the Orthodox Church of Belize. The original American School of Music was founded in 1886 by John James Hattstaedt (1851–1931). The conservatory was incorporated as an Illinois non-profit corporation. It was located in Chicago until 1991 when its Board of Trustees — chaired by Frederic Wilbur Hickman (b. 1927) — voted to close the institution, file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, liquidate the assets, and dissolve the non-profit corporation. The original President, Dean and key staff continued with the school at Indiana as a religious entity.(Ewater58 (talk) 01:05, 6 March 2012 (UTC))
  • As I have stated somewhere else on this page, I have not yet seen any evidence to indicate that the ACM currently operating in Hammond, Indiana, is notable per Wikipedia criteria. Accordingly, it cannot become the subject of an article. The historical entity is, however, notable. The Hammond operation can be discussed in this article, but it cannot be the main topic. --Orlady (talk) 05:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

American Conservatory of Music

The American Conservatory of Music (ACM) was a major American school of music founded in 1886 by John James Hattstaedt (1851–1931).[1] The conservatory was incorporated as an Illinois non-profit corporation. It was located in Chicago until 1991 when its Board of Trustees — chaired by Frederic Wilbur Hickman (b. 1927)[2] — voted to close the institution, file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, liquidate the assets, and dissolve the corporation.[3][4] An organization in Hammond, Indiana, currently uses the name "American Conservatory of Music" and identifies itself as the continuation of the Chicago institution.[5]

This article should not be disputed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by X00001223 (talk • contribs) 15:33, 27 February 2012‎


This would be more appropriate:

The American Conservatory of Music is a school of music based in Belize (formerly British Honduras) in Central America, with campus in Hammond, Indiana of USA, under the management of the Orthodox Church of Belize. The original American School of Music was founded in 1886 by John James Hattstaedt (1851–1931). The conservatory was incorporated as an Illinois non-profit corporation. It was located in Chicago until 1991 when its Board of Trustees — chaired by Frederic Wilbur Hickman (b. 1927) — voted to close the institution, file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, liquidate the assets, and dissolve the non-profit corporation. The original President, Dean and key staff continued with the school at Indiana as a religious entity. (Ewater58 (talk) 00:33, 28 February 2012 (UTC))

Vandalism by X00001223

The above entry is the beginning of a sock-puppet campaign by X00001223. Instead of getting a valid response from Eurodog, we see somebody new (creating a new account) pounding the table with the false and misleading statements as if somehow its repetition will give a sense of legitimacy. Such behavior will not constructively find any solution to the improvement of this article. I am waiting for Eurodog and Orlady to realize that the article, as they would like it to be, is factually inaccurate and must be changed to conform to wp:NPOV and wp:Verifiability. Rheesmusic (talk) 18:45, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree that there are inaccuracies. The story, as told on the current ACM website, tho, does not make it easily untangable, because, among other things, aspects of it are rife with attacks against wikipedia, the editors for which, at the end of the day, are dutybound to adhere to third party published sources — preferably sources that are credible and well-known. This may seem like a high-bar, given the junk one finds on wikipedia. The bar needn't be high in most cases; but when there's a dispute, those sources carry water.
It is clear that a number of wonderful people from the old ACM waged an effort to revive ACM from the ashes of bankruptcy; and it is clear that the new ACM acquired some of the records, and even some assets (library materials, etc.) passed on from one of the main creditors (the landlord) who wanted to help; so the story is a bit more complicated than meets the eye. I am not in any way connected to ACM, nor have I ever lived in the Midwest. I stumbled over this article when adding the name of a musician.
After having reviewed much of the published materials, namely from major media, and from the States Attorneys Generals of Illinois and Indiana, and from regulatory agencies of both states, it is difficult to see it your way — but your objection has been repeatedly noted and tags remain.
I am only one editor. And, no editor or administrator is a ruler. But, we all are doing our utmost to follow some guidelines. And, I, for one, feel strongly that we should steer clear of allowing misrepresentation of people, especially living people, and misrepresentations of institutions entrusted by people. The story of the new ACM, operating under the auspices of the Orthodox Church of Belize, should be developed (in my opinion); but it is a stretch to say that the Hammond / Belize entity is the same entity as the one that liquidated in 1991. For one thing, the old one offered music diplomas as an accredited institution. The new one, according to its website, is more of a religious operation. The new entity still has its critics from wikipedia, namely over whether it meets a litmus test of notability. Normally, the litmus test is actually pretty low when it comes to the arts; but, it's high if editors think that the article is spreading BS. But links to the new ACM site that denigrate wikipedia and its editors call the question. Eurodog 22:03, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Old ACM not the same institution as original ACM

Using the prevailing theory espoused by current versions of the American Conservatory of Music article, surrounding whether an institution ceases to exist, it appears that the "old ACM" is not the same institution as the one that John J. Hattstaedt formed, since the entity that died on June 1, 1992, appears to have been formed on January 23, 1941 after the original entity died! Of course this conclusion is just as wrong as the theory of the current article, since it is obvious that the entity change in the year 1941 had nothing whatsoever to do with the continuity of the institution called the American Conservatory of Music. Is there a court precedent that would contradict that reasoning? So now, what about the entity change in 1991? What is so different about that? The answer is that there is no difference because the entity change had nothing whatsoever to do with the continuity of the institution called the American Conservatory of Music. Ematiry (talk) 04:31, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Astonishing theory, as there is nothing in the article that so much as hints at any change in the organization in 1941. --Orlady (talk) 13:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:American_Conservatory_of_Music/Archive_1&oldid=1177706082"