Robinson Cole LLP
High Contrast Mode

Education

Education

The issues faced by our education clients are as diverse and complex as the members of their communities, from governance and administration to employees and students. Our education lawyers use a cross-disciplinary, collaborative approach to provide educational institutions with creative and practical solutions in an increasingly complex and ever-changing regulatory landscape. Our clients range from large universities to small independent schools, and we recognize that solutions are not always a one-size-fits-all approach. Understanding that needs differ amongst schools, our attorneys provide guidance or assist with problem solving in a manner that prioritizes the goals of our individual clients. Our experience includes handling most of a client’s legal needs to managing discrete issues for clients. In all cases, we offer clients personal attention, responsiveness, cost efficiency, and creative, alternative approaches to fees.

Decisions in one area often cause ripples elsewhere that can disrupt the equilibrium of an institution. Our lawyers know this, and they work together and with clients to assess risk and provide practical solutions. When necessary, our attorneys guide clients through processes to resolve disputes early and efficiently. If early resolution is not possible, we are prepared to pursue a resolution in any forum, including litigation.

Our education team spans many of Robinson+Cole’s practice groups, ready to assist with contract review, litigation, employment needs, immigration, and even healthcare. While you can read more on our individual practice area pages,

  • Our lawyers help educational institutions navigate an increasingly complex and ever-changing regulatory landscape by providing practical advice on a wide range of governance and tax issues
  • We have experience working closely with institutions to ensure college athletic programs maximize student experiences while minimizing the risk to the institution.
  • Our team routinely counsel clients on different issues involving student rights, including student issues involving discrimination, accommodations, study abroad programs, student conduct, student housing, student organizations, student speech & campus unrest, Title IX & student sexual misconduct, hazing, admissions, academic performance and misconduct, internships, student handbook development, and alcohol and cannabis policies.
  • Regarding faculty and staff, our attorneys’ partner with educational clients not only to address discrete disputes involving employees, but also to harness the strengths of their employees to realize their strategic visions and missions.
  • We offer imaginative solutions to help you fully capitalize on the possibilities and practicalities of developing and protecting your intellectual property, including licensing. registration, enforcement of copyrights, patents and trademarks, technology transfers, and infringement lawsuits.
  • Regarding facilities and campus development, our lawyers are experienced in guiding educational institutions through the unique pressures they face in maintaining and expanding their campuses and investment properties.
  • When it comes to litigation and dispute resolution, nearly a third of our lawyers engage in trial work across a far-ranging variety of areas, with the geographic reach of our practice meeting the regional, national, and global nature of our clients' operations.
  • Lastly, on the topic of health care, we work with college and university counsel presented with health care compliance rules and regulations pertaining to their student health centers, clinical institutes and programs, external clinical affiliations, COVID-19 testing services and vaccination requirements, and general health care services arrangements.

Our lawyers closely monitor developments in the education sector. We maintain active membership in, attend and present at national and regional conferences for leading organizations such as the National Association of College and University Attorneys, the Higher Education Real Estate Lawyers, the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts, and the Licensing Executive Society.

Education Law Practice Areas

  • Governance
  • Athletics
  • Compliance & Risk Management
  • Student Affairs
  • Faculty & Staff
  • Intellectual Property
  • Facilities & Campus Development
  • Litigation & Dispute Resolution 
  • Healthcare 

Experience


Shanley Hall, Providence College – Rhode Island

Representation of Providence College in the drafting and negotiation of the construction contract in the construction of its first new residence hall since 2005. Shanley Hall is a new six-story, suite style residence hall named for former, longtime PC President Rev. Brian Shanley O.P., and is intended for sophomore students featuring approximately 360 beds in the 120,000 square foot building.

Read More

Windermere School – Ellington, Connecticut

Representation of the Town of Ellington in the drafting and negotiation of the RFPs and contracts for the project management, design, construction, and consulting agreements in the "renovate-to-new" Windermere School Project. The $74 million project involved the renovation of about 55% of the structure, demolishing other portions, and building a 38,000-square-foot addition.

Read More

Candlewood Lake Elementary School – Brookfield, CT

Representation of the Town of Brookfield, CT in the drafting of the construction management agreement for a new elementary school to replace the existing Huckleberry Hill Elementary School. In addition to new classroom facilities and administrative offices, the finished project, known as the Candlewood Lake Elementary School, includes both an Early Childhood Center for Pre-K and First Grades, with separate entry and drop-off, and a 5th Grade Academy to help prepare older students for transition to middle school, and integrates existing hills and wetlands at the site into the design as a teaching opportunity.

Read More


Publications


November 19, 2025

Here are 3 big AI-related legal issues for higher ed

University Business

As artificial intelligence rapidly transforms the landscape of higher education, college and university administrators are finding themselves on the frontlines of new, and sometimes unprecedented, legal challenges. While much of the public discourse has focused on students using AI tools to cheat, the legal implications for administrators are far broader. From data privacy laws to anti-discrimination requirements and the complexities of policy development, the legal environment is evolving just as quickly as the technology itself. This article identifies three significant AI-related legal issues facing higher education administrators—and provides actionable suggestions to navigate these challenges. Data privacy, security, and compliance The Challenge AI systems in higher education collect and process large amounts of personal and institutional data, including student records, behavioral analytics and, increasingly, biometric information. Administrators face overlapping data privacy laws, including the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, evolving state privacy statutes, and international regulations such as the General Data Protection Regulation. These laws establish strict requirements for how student and institutional data must be collected, stored and shared, and they are designed to protect individual privacy and prevent unauthorized access or misuse of sensitive information. As AI technologies become more pervasive, ensuring compliance with these regulations is crucial to avoid legal penalties and maintain trust within the academic community. AI-driven platforms often share data with third-party vendors, raising substantial questions about consent, control and oversight. As we enter a new year, the legal liability for data breaches or improper sharing is heightened by increased regulatory enforcement and class action litigation regarding student and employee data privacy. To protect against this liability: Ensure contracts with third-party vendors require compliance with all relevant privacy laws and set clear protocols for breach notification and data handling Provide clear, advance notice and obtain valid consent whenever personal data, especially sensitive or student/employee data, is collected or shared Collect and retain only the minimum amount of data necessary for the stated purpose Continually audit vendors and internal processes for compliance, and quickly address potential vulnerabilities Have robust response plans for breaches, and be prepared with documentation of compliance efforts. Practical steps for administrators Audit existing data practices: Proactively conduct an audit of all AI systems and third-party vendors to map data flows and ensure compliance with current federal and state laws and regularly review how institutional stakeholders use and input information into AI systems. Update contracts: Strengthen contract language with vendors to mandate compliance with privacy standards, notification protocols, and data protection requirements. Develop clear policies: Draft and disseminate clear institutional privacy and contracting policies tailored to AI tools and ensure ongoing training for staff and students. Algorithmic bias and discrimination risks The Challenge AI systems used for admissions, grading, advising and faculty hiring can inadvertently perpetuate or amplify bias, potentially running afoul of federal antidiscrimination laws such as Title VI, Title IX and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Algorithms trained on historical data may entrench past inequities, and lack of transparency can make it difficult to audit decision-making. Litigation and regulatory actions alleging disparate impact and failure to prevent discrimination are increasing, putting institutional reputation and accreditation at risk. Institutions adopting AI systems in admissions, evaluation and other critical processes must proactively address potential sources of bias and ensure compliance with relevant antidiscrimination laws. Key lessons include the importance of ongoing auditing and transparency in AI decision-making, involving diverse stakeholders in system design, and regularly updating algorithms to reflect current, equitable standards rather than outdated or biased historical data. Proactive risk management, including legal reviews and bias mitigation strategies, not only helps avoid liability but also upholds institutional values of fairness, inclusion, and integrity. Practical Steps for Administrators Assess and monitor AI systems: Require regular, independent testing of AI systems for evidence of disparate impact or discriminatory outcomes. Demand explainable AI: Insist that vendors provide audit trails and “explainability” features for all decision-making algorithms. Build diverse oversight panels: Establish interdisciplinary committees—including legal, ethics, IT and DEI representatives—to oversee adoption and review of AI tools. Academic integrity and AI-generated content The Challenge While AI-enabled cheating is top-of-mind, the legal issues go deeper: unclear policies about AI use, inconsistent enforcement and concerns about due process. Ambiguous rules expose institutions to challenges by students and faculty alike, particularly when disciplinary action is taken. Federal grant agencies are increasingly regulating the use of AI in applications, with some restricting or requiring disclosures where AI-generated content is included. Defining and enforcing what constitutes permissible AI use will be a central legal and reputational challenge for institutions next year and beyond. Practical steps for administrators Clarify codes of conduct: Update student and faculty codes of conduct to explicitly address AI and its varied uses in academic work. Ensure procedural fairness: Prepare due process protocols and hearing procedures for alleged AI-related infractions, to reduce the risk of successful legal challenges. Educate the community: Launch ongoing educational campaigns highlighting ethical AI use, provide guidance on distinguishing between collaboration and misconduct, and provide timely information on compliance with federal regulations and agency-specific guidance on the use of AI in sponsored programs. Leading in a new era For higher ed administrators, successfully navigating the legal landscape of AI in 2026 demands a proactive, multidisciplinary approach. By prioritizing data privacy, guarding against algorithmic bias and updating policies around academic integrity, institutions can mitigate risk while harnessing the benefits of AI. Implementing these practical measures will position universities not merely to comply with the law, but to lead in this new era of technology-enhanced education.

Legal Update: Federal Court Enjoins NCAA’s “Five-Year Rule” for JUCO Athletes teaser
November 4, 2025

Legal Update: Federal Court Enjoins NCAA’s “Five-Year Rule” for JUCO Athletes

February 11, 2025

AI is transforming higher ed: What you need for compliance and governance

University Business

As generative artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being integrated into higher education…it raises concerns about its ethical and effective use, including data privacy and security issues around the data input into these AI systems, and the potential for algorithm bias. Co-authors Kate Dion and Kathryn Rattigan suggest that as colleges and universities tackle this new era of generative AI, they may wish to consider implementing an AI governance program. The authors identify several key aspects that an AI governance program should encompass including data governance and privacy, risk management and continuous monitoring and improvement. “By integrating these components, a university can develop a robust AI governance program that aligns with ethical standards, ensures data protection, and fosters a safe and inclusive educational environment.” Read the article.

November 19, 2025

Here are 3 big AI-related legal issues for higher ed

University Business

As artificial intelligence rapidly transforms the landscape of higher education, college and university administrators are finding themselves on the frontlines of new, and sometimes unprecedented, legal challenges. While much of the public discourse has focused on students using AI tools to cheat, the legal implications for administrators are far broader. From data privacy laws to anti-discrimination requirements and the complexities of policy development, the legal environment is evolving just as quickly as the technology itself. This article identifies three significant AI-related legal issues facing higher education administrators—and provides actionable suggestions to navigate these challenges. Data privacy, security, and compliance The Challenge AI systems in higher education collect and process large amounts of personal and institutional data, including student records, behavioral analytics and, increasingly, biometric information. Administrators face overlapping data privacy laws, including the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, evolving state privacy statutes, and international regulations such as the General Data Protection Regulation. These laws establish strict requirements for how student and institutional data must be collected, stored and shared, and they are designed to protect individual privacy and prevent unauthorized access or misuse of sensitive information. As AI technologies become more pervasive, ensuring compliance with these regulations is crucial to avoid legal penalties and maintain trust within the academic community. AI-driven platforms often share data with third-party vendors, raising substantial questions about consent, control and oversight. As we enter a new year, the legal liability for data breaches or improper sharing is heightened by increased regulatory enforcement and class action litigation regarding student and employee data privacy. To protect against this liability: Ensure contracts with third-party vendors require compliance with all relevant privacy laws and set clear protocols for breach notification and data handling Provide clear, advance notice and obtain valid consent whenever personal data, especially sensitive or student/employee data, is collected or shared Collect and retain only the minimum amount of data necessary for the stated purpose Continually audit vendors and internal processes for compliance, and quickly address potential vulnerabilities Have robust response plans for breaches, and be prepared with documentation of compliance efforts. Practical steps for administrators Audit existing data practices: Proactively conduct an audit of all AI systems and third-party vendors to map data flows and ensure compliance with current federal and state laws and regularly review how institutional stakeholders use and input information into AI systems. Update contracts: Strengthen contract language with vendors to mandate compliance with privacy standards, notification protocols, and data protection requirements. Develop clear policies: Draft and disseminate clear institutional privacy and contracting policies tailored to AI tools and ensure ongoing training for staff and students. Algorithmic bias and discrimination risks The Challenge AI systems used for admissions, grading, advising and faculty hiring can inadvertently perpetuate or amplify bias, potentially running afoul of federal antidiscrimination laws such as Title VI, Title IX and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Algorithms trained on historical data may entrench past inequities, and lack of transparency can make it difficult to audit decision-making. Litigation and regulatory actions alleging disparate impact and failure to prevent discrimination are increasing, putting institutional reputation and accreditation at risk. Institutions adopting AI systems in admissions, evaluation and other critical processes must proactively address potential sources of bias and ensure compliance with relevant antidiscrimination laws. Key lessons include the importance of ongoing auditing and transparency in AI decision-making, involving diverse stakeholders in system design, and regularly updating algorithms to reflect current, equitable standards rather than outdated or biased historical data. Proactive risk management, including legal reviews and bias mitigation strategies, not only helps avoid liability but also upholds institutional values of fairness, inclusion, and integrity. Practical Steps for Administrators Assess and monitor AI systems: Require regular, independent testing of AI systems for evidence of disparate impact or discriminatory outcomes. Demand explainable AI: Insist that vendors provide audit trails and “explainability” features for all decision-making algorithms. Build diverse oversight panels: Establish interdisciplinary committees—including legal, ethics, IT and DEI representatives—to oversee adoption and review of AI tools. Academic integrity and AI-generated content The Challenge While AI-enabled cheating is top-of-mind, the legal issues go deeper: unclear policies about AI use, inconsistent enforcement and concerns about due process. Ambiguous rules expose institutions to challenges by students and faculty alike, particularly when disciplinary action is taken. Federal grant agencies are increasingly regulating the use of AI in applications, with some restricting or requiring disclosures where AI-generated content is included. Defining and enforcing what constitutes permissible AI use will be a central legal and reputational challenge for institutions next year and beyond. Practical steps for administrators Clarify codes of conduct: Update student and faculty codes of conduct to explicitly address AI and its varied uses in academic work. Ensure procedural fairness: Prepare due process protocols and hearing procedures for alleged AI-related infractions, to reduce the risk of successful legal challenges. Educate the community: Launch ongoing educational campaigns highlighting ethical AI use, provide guidance on distinguishing between collaboration and misconduct, and provide timely information on compliance with federal regulations and agency-specific guidance on the use of AI in sponsored programs. Leading in a new era For higher ed administrators, successfully navigating the legal landscape of AI in 2026 demands a proactive, multidisciplinary approach. By prioritizing data privacy, guarding against algorithmic bias and updating policies around academic integrity, institutions can mitigate risk while harnessing the benefits of AI. Implementing these practical measures will position universities not merely to comply with the law, but to lead in this new era of technology-enhanced education.

Legal Update: Federal Court Enjoins NCAA’s “Five-Year Rule” for JUCO Athletes teaser
November 4, 2025

Legal Update: Federal Court Enjoins NCAA’s “Five-Year Rule” for JUCO Athletes

February 11, 2025

AI is transforming higher ed: What you need for compliance and governance

University Business

As generative artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being integrated into higher education…it raises concerns about its ethical and effective use, including data privacy and security issues around the data input into these AI systems, and the potential for algorithm bias. Co-authors Kate Dion and Kathryn Rattigan suggest that as colleges and universities tackle this new era of generative AI, they may wish to consider implementing an AI governance program. The authors identify several key aspects that an AI governance program should encompass including data governance and privacy, risk management and continuous monitoring and improvement. “By integrating these components, a university can develop a robust AI governance program that aligns with ethical standards, ensures data protection, and fosters a safe and inclusive educational environment.” Read the article.

November 5, 2024

Where Are New Title IX Regulations Not Enforceable?

By August 1, 2024, educational institutions across the country were required to implement the Biden administration’s new regulations concerning Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which contained numerous expansions on the law’s protections. As anticipated, litigation followed, resulting in district courts issuing preliminary injunctions barring enforcement throughout the country. As of now, the 2024 regulations are enjoined from being enforced in nearly 26 states. While the litigations play out in due course, institutions in affected states will want to be on the lookout for any changes to these preliminary injunctions, and consider whether any state laws weigh into their consideration to amend their policies consistent with the new regulations. Read the article.

September 26, 2024

How NLRB Memo Balances Schools' Labor, Privacy Concerns

Law360

The article focuses on the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) recent memo aimed at helping colleges reconcile the competing obligations of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The Expert Analysis piece was re-published from Natale’s September 6, 2024 legal update. Read the article.

Legal Update: NLRB General Counsel Tries to Reconcile FERPA and the NLRA teaser
September 6, 2024

Legal Update: NLRB General Counsel Tries to Reconcile FERPA and the NLRA

August 16, 2024

Schools Need To Consider These Seven Key Questions/New Title IX Compliance

BusinessWest

With the start of this new academic year, schools in jurisdictions not covered by a Federal injunction or listed here were required to comply with the new Title IX regulations by August 1, 2024. In their article, Kate and Sabrina share a list of top questions federally funded institutions are urged to have answers for. “[A]s institutions ensure compliance with the new regulations, it would not be surprising to see schools continue to revise policies based on how the new procedures pan out in practice,” Kate and Sabrina write. “This is especially true given that the new regulations give schools more autonomy in deciding how to manage grievance procedures and related policies…Title IX teams should keep an eye out for how their chosen policies work in practice and consider any needed changes as the school year progresses.” Read the article.

June 28, 2024

With New Title IX Regs Come New Cost Implications

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly

With the Aug. 1 implementation date fast approaching, the authors discussed potential increased costs associated with three areas of the new Title IX regulations: compliance requirements, the increased scope of applicability and grievance procedures. The revised regulations broaden the definition of sexual harassment and discrimination, remove barriers to reporting misconduct, and provide educational institutions with greater autonomy over their grievance procedures, including the option to revert to a single- investigator model and to choose whether to conduct live hearings. To ensure compliance with the new regulations by the Aug. 1 effective date, institutions can expect increased costs associated with updating their policies, procedures and training. While the authors recognize that these cost increases and compliance with the new regulations will affect schools differently depending on size and resources, schools can anticipate receiving more complaints and carrying out more investigations as a result of the broadened scope of Title IX applicability, both of which will require greater use of resources. Ultimately, individual schools can evaluate what procedures work best — both for the institution and the students. Read the article. Erica Whaley, candidate juris doctor at Roger Williams University School of Law and member of the firm’s 2024 summer associate class, contributed to the research, drafting and editing of the article.

June 3, 2024

Title IX coordinator: More than just a mandatory role

University Business

On the heels of recently released Title IX regulations, Kate and Sabrina identify how the role Title IX coordinator continues to ramp up as schools begin to implement the new regulations by August 1, 2024. All schools receiving federal financial assistance are required to designate at least one employee as their coordinator, with that person being “responsible for not only understanding Title IX’s evolving requirements but for ensuring the school’s compliance with them.” In addition, Title IX coordinators will be crucial in ensuring compliance in critical areas such as training of all employees about their obligations under the new regulations, policy drafting and grievance procedures. Read the article.



November 5, 2024

Where Are New Title IX Regulations Not Enforceable?

By August 1, 2024, educational institutions across the country were required to implement the Biden administration’s new regulations concerning Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which contained numerous expansions on the law’s protections. As anticipated, litigation followed, resulting in district courts issuing preliminary injunctions barring enforcement throughout the country. As of now, the 2024 regulations are enjoined from being enforced in nearly 26 states. While the litigations play out in due course, institutions in affected states will want to be on the lookout for any changes to these preliminary injunctions, and consider whether any state laws weigh into their consideration to amend their policies consistent with the new regulations. Read the article.

September 26, 2024

How NLRB Memo Balances Schools' Labor, Privacy Concerns

Law360

The article focuses on the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) recent memo aimed at helping colleges reconcile the competing obligations of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The Expert Analysis piece was re-published from Natale’s September 6, 2024 legal update. Read the article.

Legal Update: NLRB General Counsel Tries to Reconcile FERPA and the NLRA teaser
September 6, 2024

Legal Update: NLRB General Counsel Tries to Reconcile FERPA and the NLRA

August 16, 2024

Schools Need To Consider These Seven Key Questions/New Title IX Compliance

BusinessWest

With the start of this new academic year, schools in jurisdictions not covered by a Federal injunction or listed here were required to comply with the new Title IX regulations by August 1, 2024. In their article, Kate and Sabrina share a list of top questions federally funded institutions are urged to have answers for. “[A]s institutions ensure compliance with the new regulations, it would not be surprising to see schools continue to revise policies based on how the new procedures pan out in practice,” Kate and Sabrina write. “This is especially true given that the new regulations give schools more autonomy in deciding how to manage grievance procedures and related policies…Title IX teams should keep an eye out for how their chosen policies work in practice and consider any needed changes as the school year progresses.” Read the article.

June 28, 2024

With New Title IX Regs Come New Cost Implications

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly

With the Aug. 1 implementation date fast approaching, the authors discussed potential increased costs associated with three areas of the new Title IX regulations: compliance requirements, the increased scope of applicability and grievance procedures. The revised regulations broaden the definition of sexual harassment and discrimination, remove barriers to reporting misconduct, and provide educational institutions with greater autonomy over their grievance procedures, including the option to revert to a single- investigator model and to choose whether to conduct live hearings. To ensure compliance with the new regulations by the Aug. 1 effective date, institutions can expect increased costs associated with updating their policies, procedures and training. While the authors recognize that these cost increases and compliance with the new regulations will affect schools differently depending on size and resources, schools can anticipate receiving more complaints and carrying out more investigations as a result of the broadened scope of Title IX applicability, both of which will require greater use of resources. Ultimately, individual schools can evaluate what procedures work best — both for the institution and the students. Read the article. Erica Whaley, candidate juris doctor at Roger Williams University School of Law and member of the firm’s 2024 summer associate class, contributed to the research, drafting and editing of the article.

June 3, 2024

Title IX coordinator: More than just a mandatory role

University Business

On the heels of recently released Title IX regulations, Kate and Sabrina identify how the role Title IX coordinator continues to ramp up as schools begin to implement the new regulations by August 1, 2024. All schools receiving federal financial assistance are required to designate at least one employee as their coordinator, with that person being “responsible for not only understanding Title IX’s evolving requirements but for ensuring the school’s compliance with them.” In addition, Title IX coordinators will be crucial in ensuring compliance in critical areas such as training of all employees about their obligations under the new regulations, policy drafting and grievance procedures. Read the article.


News


November 25, 2025

Kathleen Dion and Kathryn Rattigan Spotlight Three AI-related Legal Issues Facing Higher Education Administrators

Education industry team chair Kathleen E. Dion and Kathryn M. Rattigan, member of the Artificial Intelligence Team and Data Privacy + Cybersecurity Team discussed AI-related legal issues in their article, “Here are 3 big AI-related legal issues for higher ed,” published in University Business on November 19, 2025. Kate and Kathryn highlight data privacy, security and compliance; algorithmic bias and discrimination risks; and academic integrity and AI-generated content as three of the most significant legal issues currently challenging higher education administrators. They provide a clear road map with actionable suggestions for each legal issue that administrators can implement immediately. Read the article.

University Business
November 6, 2025

Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 Super Lawyers®

Recognition spans key regions and highlights the firm’s seasoned practitioners and emerging leaders in many business transactions and litigation practices
Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
June 5, 2025

Robinson+Cole Secures 45 Total Rankings in Chambers USA 2025 Guide

Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business
Robinson+Cole Secures 45 Total Rankings in <i>Chambers USA 2025</i> Guide teaser
November 25, 2025

Kathleen Dion and Kathryn Rattigan Spotlight Three AI-related Legal Issues Facing Higher Education Administrators

Education industry team chair Kathleen E. Dion and Kathryn M. Rattigan, member of the Artificial Intelligence Team and Data Privacy + Cybersecurity Team discussed AI-related legal issues in their article, “Here are 3 big AI-related legal issues for higher ed,” published in University Business on November 19, 2025. Kate and Kathryn highlight data privacy, security and compliance; algorithmic bias and discrimination risks; and academic integrity and AI-generated content as three of the most significant legal issues currently challenging higher education administrators. They provide a clear road map with actionable suggestions for each legal issue that administrators can implement immediately. Read the article.

University Business
November 6, 2025

Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 Super Lawyers®

Recognition spans key regions and highlights the firm’s seasoned practitioners and emerging leaders in many business transactions and litigation practices
Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
June 5, 2025

Robinson+Cole Secures 45 Total Rankings in Chambers USA 2025 Guide

Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business
Robinson+Cole Secures 45 Total Rankings in <i>Chambers USA 2025</i> Guide teaser
February 14, 2025

Kate Dion and Kathryn Rattigan Co-Author Article on Artificial Intelligence Compliance and Governance in Higher Education

University Business
November 5, 2024

Kate Dion and Sabrina Galli Co-Author BusinessWest Article On The Enforceability of New Title IX Regulations

BusinessWest
October 31, 2024

Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 Super Lawyers®

Thomson Reuters
Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
October 9, 2024

Robinson+Cole Recognized in 2025 Edition of Benchmark Litigation

August 19, 2024

Kate Dion and Sabrina Galli Co-Author BusinessWest Article on Key Questions for Schools to Consider Regarding New Title IX Regulations

BusinessWest
July 19, 2024

Kate Dion and Sabrina Galli Co-Author Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly Article On Cost Implications of New Title IX Regulations

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly

February 14, 2025

Kate Dion and Kathryn Rattigan Co-Author Article on Artificial Intelligence Compliance and Governance in Higher Education

University Business
November 5, 2024

Kate Dion and Sabrina Galli Co-Author BusinessWest Article On The Enforceability of New Title IX Regulations

BusinessWest
October 31, 2024

Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 Super Lawyers®

Thomson Reuters
Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
October 9, 2024

Robinson+Cole Recognized in 2025 Edition of Benchmark Litigation

August 19, 2024

Kate Dion and Sabrina Galli Co-Author BusinessWest Article on Key Questions for Schools to Consider Regarding New Title IX Regulations

BusinessWest
July 19, 2024

Kate Dion and Sabrina Galli Co-Author Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly Article On Cost Implications of New Title IX Regulations

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly

Events


Past

One Big Beautiful Bill

Mar 19 2026
Boston Bar Association 2026 Higher Education Conference
Past

Equity in Education: University Policies Through a Legal Lens

Nov 18 2025
The Knowledge Group Live CLE Webinar
Past

One Big Beautiful Bill

Mar 19 2026
Boston Bar Association 2026 Higher Education Conference
Past

Equity in Education: University Policies Through a Legal Lens

Nov 18 2025
The Knowledge Group Live CLE Webinar
Past

2025 WNE Law Alumni Awards

Nov 14 2025
Western New England University
Past

Equity in Education: University Policies Through a Legal Lens

Oct 16 2025
The Knowledge Group Live CLE Webinar
Past

Navigating a New Frontier: Data Breaches, Litigation and the Role of AI in Higher Ed's Digital Risk Future

Jun 3 2025
Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics (SCCE) 2025 Higher Education Compliance Conference
Past

The Evolving Threat Landscape in Higher Education

Feb 13 2025
Emmanuel College Risk Management Symposium
Past

2025 WNE Law Alumni Awards

Nov 14 2025
Western New England University
Past

Equity in Education: University Policies Through a Legal Lens

Oct 16 2025
The Knowledge Group Live CLE Webinar
Past

Navigating a New Frontier: Data Breaches, Litigation and the Role of AI in Higher Ed's Digital Risk Future

Jun 3 2025
Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics (SCCE) 2025 Higher Education Compliance Conference
Past

The Evolving Threat Landscape in Higher Education

Feb 13 2025
Emmanuel College Risk Management Symposium