ILNews

CLEO interns assigned to Court of Appeals, Tax Court

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Eight students from three law schools have been selected for summer internships with judges of the Indiana Court of Appeals and Tax Court through the 2014 Carr L. Darden Conference for Legal Education Opportunity internship program.

The 10-week internships will immerse the students in the court’s daily work, guided by some of Indiana’s most accomplished and respected jurists. The interns will also make site visits to other courts and government agencies, including U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, the Office of the Indiana Attorney General, the Indiana Department of Correction and Marion Superior Court.

“CLEO is win-win-win,” Chief Judge Nancy H. Vaidik said. “Our interns win through their immersion in the court’s day to day work. The court benefits from their energy and passion. And the legal profession gains a more diverse pool of people entering the law.”

The paid internships are part of the Indiana judiciary’s CLEO program that assists minority, low-income or educationally disadvantaged students pursue law degrees and legal careers. Interns and their summer assignment are as follows:

Court of Appeals:

  • Tyler M. Alford, Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law; assigned to Chief Judge Nancy Vaidik
  • Jennie D. Bell, Valparaiso University School of Law; Judge Patricia Riley
  • Lori Chen, Indiana University Maurer School of Law; Judge Ezra Friedlander
  • Norman E. Cooke Jr., IU Maurer; Judge Rudolph Pyle III
  • Maurice L. Fulton II, Valparaiso; Judge Michael Barnes
  • Karim Merchant, Valparaiso; Judge Terry Crone
  • Elaina J. Streisel, IU McKinney; Judge Elaine Brown

Tax Court:

  • Jazmin Harris, IU Maurer; Judge Martha Blood Wentworth.

More information about the CLEO program is available here.

   

 

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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT