Wait...is it the same grading scale and curve for the part-time classes as full-time classes? If the answer to that question is yes, then I don't think your complaint holds water.
That is because your "peer" argument is pretty much inconsequential once you answer the curve question. Curves are designed to take out all sorts of inequities between to peer groups. Your arguments focus on all of the advantages full-time students have, and all of the disadvantages part-time students have. However, those students don't compete against one another head-to-head for grades--so the inequities don't come into play for your GPA. If your GPA wasn't high enough to make the Top 1/3 it was not because of some hidden bias or unfair disadvantage. It was because you didn't beat enough of your part-time peers on exams throughout law school.
Part-timers at UNLV graduating in 2008 are not some completely foreign peer group to full-timers at UNLV graduating in 2008. Any differences can be substantially accounted for by a curve.I stand by my argument that the system is not unfair. You got stuck in a bad situation as one of the few students who placed in the Top 1/3 as a part-timer and not after the curves were combined. That doesn't mean the system is unfair. The same thing could happen to a full-timer next year. The moral of the story is, when attending UNLV, one should place in the top 20% and not worry about being left out.
I just don't believe you that pretty much the entire top 1/3 of the part-timers were shut out from the top 1/3 overall. That seems pretty much like a mathematical impossibility. And frankly, I have zero sympathy for part-timers. Everything you have talked about as a blatant miscarriage of justice is something you should have taken into account before going part-time. It is not like part-time status doesn't come with benefits. You don't accumulate debt, and you can get into a more reputable school with lower GPA/LSAT scores. Weigh the costs and benefits. Additionally, if I were a full-timer at UNLV I'd be pissed that part-timers were integrated into my rankings distribution. If someone pulls a bunch of A's and A-'s against lesser competition, do they really deserve a top 10% ranking?
After reading this thread, I figured out why at least one person wasnt top 30% at that school...