Akins filed a complaint alleging wrongful termination and fraud against AI after reporting discrepancies in state licensing exam grading. Judge Jeremy Daniel ruled that Akins provided sufficient specificity in her claims, dismissing AI's argument that no fraud was indicated. Akins alleged retaliation after reporting concerns to her supervisor and interacting with AI leadership, including the CEO. AI representatives stated their commitment to the integrity of their processes, maintaining that the allegations are without merit. The case continues as Akins seeks justice and asserts that the alleged misconduct dates back to 2008.
Ultimately, Judge Jeremy Daniel ruled that Akins sufficiently stated her case, indicating that she was wrongfully terminated for reporting alleged fraudulent conduct at AI.
Akins noted the discrepancies in state licensing exam grading, suggesting that the alleged misconduct at AI might have begun as far back as 2008.
Jordan Matyas, Akins' attorney, expressed satisfaction with the court's ruling and stated, 'We will continue to pursue justice for her wrongful termination.'
AI maintains that the allegations against them are without merit, emphasizing the rigor of their education and examination procedures.
Collection
[
|
...
]