ILNews

Attorney, ICLU founder dies

Jennifer Nelson
January 1, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
A prominent and well-respected labor attorney who had a great impact on Indianapolis and the legal community died July 27.

Alan T. Nolan, an attorney, author, and historian, was 85. Calling and a memorial service will be Aug. 10 and 11.

Nolan was born in Evansville and moved to Indianapolis at the age of 10. He attended Harvard Law School and clerked for Sherman Minton at the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago. He returned to Indianapolis in 1948 and practiced law for 45 years with the firm that is now Ice Miller.

Nolan was one of the first attorneys in the labor practice at the firm at that time and helped to create it, said Ice Miller partner Byron Myers, who counted both Nolan and his brother, Val, as advisers. When Myers was in law school, Val Nolan was a professor at Indiana University School of Law - Bloomington and was Myers' mentor. When he joined the law firm, Alan Nolan became his mentor.

"I worked with Alan for years here," Myers said. "Alan was just an excellent attorney, a consummate professional that I was privileged to know as a colleague and a friend for many years."

Nolan practiced at Ice Miller until he retired in 1993. During his legal career, he served as chairman of the firm's management committee and spent seven years as chairman of the Disciplinary Commission of the Indiana Supreme Court. He and another attorney from his firm helped found the Indiana Civil Liberties Union in the early 1950s, now known as the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana. It was controversial at the time because some people believed the ACLU was linked to communism, according to historical accounts.

Nolan also had a passion for history, especially the Civil War. He authored several books about it, including "The Iron Brigade: A Military History," which has been named by Civil War Times Illustrated as one of the "100 best books ever written on the Civil War."

Nolan would travel to lecture at universities, round tables, and the Smithsonian Institution. His interest in history led to an active role at the Indiana Historical Society where he served on the board and was a chairman for 12 years during the planning and construction of the current facility. Myers said many people at Ice Miller have read Nolan's books and that he was a fascinating man to talk with about history and the Civil War.

"Al was a wonderful guy. He had the kind of personality that no one could ever dislike him," Myers said. "If someone was an adversary in a case, he treated everyone with respect. I never heard anyone speak ill of Al Nolan."

Calling will be from 3 to 6 p.m. Aug. 10 at the Indiana Historical Society, 450 W. Ohio St., Indianapolis. An hour of calling will precede the 11 a.m. memorial service Aug. 11 at St. Thomas Aquinas, 4625 N. Kenwood Ave., Indianapolis. In lieu of flowers, contributions may be made to the Indiana Historical Society, the Ensemble Music Society, Civil War Preservation Trust, or a favorite charity.

Nolan is survived by his wife, Jane Ransel DeVoe; children Patrick A. Nolan, Mary F. Nolan, Thomas C. Nolan, Elizabeth T. Nolan, John V. Nolan, John C. DeVoe, Ellen R. DeVoe, and Thomas R. DeVoe; sister, Kathleen Lobley; and 20 grandchildren.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT