Darden retires, announces McKinney scholarship

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Court of Appeals Judge Carr L. Darden will establish a scholarship in the name of himself and his wife of 57 years at his alma mater, the Indiana University McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis. The judge and other officials announced the scholarship Wednesday during his Statehouse retirement ceremony.

When fully endowed, The Judge Carr L. Darden and Mrs. Lundy Darden Public Sector Legal Education Scholarship will be awarded to McKinney students who have demonstrated an interest in state and local government and pursuing a career in public service. Details about the projected endowment and when the scholarship may be available were not immediately available Wednesday.

Darden said he hoped that the scholarship might in a small way help students from diverse backgrounds who want to use their legal education to serve the public. He told a packed Supreme Court gallery that each of them had encountered someone in their lives who extended a helping hand.

“We have to prepare the way for the next generation that will follow us,” said Darden, who upon turning 75 reached the statutory age of retirement for judges.

Darden said the scholarship would help defray some of the costs of law school for students who want to enter public fields of the profession that typically pay less than private practice. The scholarship also represented a way for him to give back.

“My wife and I have been given so much,” he said.

Marion Superior Judge David Shaheed said the Marion County Bar Association was a sponsor of the scholarship and would assist in raising money for it. The MCBA will host a fundraising dinner in Darden’s honor Sept. 14 at the downtown Indianapolis Marriott, 350 W. Maryland St.

Court of Appeals Chief Judge Margret Robb said Darden’s fellow judges on the court had made contributions to the scholarship fund as his parting gift from the court.

Robb also announced that the Indiana Continuing Legal Education Opportunity summer intern program that promotes diversity in the profession would henceforth be known as the Carr L. Darden CLEO summer intern program.

Darden, a former Marion Superior Court judge and chief deputy state public defender, was appointed to the Court of Appeals by Gov. Evan Bayh in 1994. He will continue to serve as a senior judge.

Gov. Mitch Daniels has until Aug. 11 to name Darden’s replacement from three candidates selected in June by the Judicial Nominating Commission. They are Marion Superior Judge Robert Altice Jr., public defender Patricia Caress McMath, and Madison Circuit Judge Rudolph Pyle III.



Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Lori, you must really love wedding cake stories like this one ... happy enuf ending for you?

  2. This new language about a warning has not been discussed at previous meetings. It's not available online. Since it must be made public knowledge before the vote, does anyone know exactly what it says? Further, this proposal was held up for 5 weeks because members Carol and Lucy insisted that all terms used be defined. So now, definitions are unnecessary and have not been inserted? Beyond these requirements, what is the logic behind giving one free pass to discriminators? Is that how laws work - break it once and that's ok? Just don't do it again? Three members of Carmel's council have done just about everything they can think of to prohibit an anti-discrimination ordinance in Carmel, much to Brainard's consternation, I'm told. These three 'want to be so careful' that they have failed to do what at least 13 other communities, including Martinsville, have already done. It's not being careful. It's standing in the way of what 60% of Carmel residents want. It's hurting CArmel in thT businesses have refused to locate because the council has not gotten with the program. And now they want to give discriminatory one free shot to do so. Unacceptable. Once three members leave the council because they lost their races, the Carmel council will have unanimous approval of the ordinance as originally drafted, not with a one free shot to discriminate freebie. That happens in January 2016. Why give a freebie when all we have to do is wait 3 months and get an ordinance with teeth from Day 1? If nothing else, can you please get s copy from Carmel and post it so we can see what else has changed in the proposal?

  3. Here is an interesting 2012 law review article for any who wish to dive deeper into this subject matter: Excerpt: "Judicial interpretation of the ADA has extended public entity liability to licensing agencies in the licensure and certification of attorneys.49 State bar examiners have the authority to conduct fitness investigations for the purpose of determining whether an applicant is a direct threat to the public.50 A “direct threat” is defined as “a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services as provided by § 35.139.”51 However, bar examiners may not utilize generalizations or stereotypes about the applicant’s disability in concluding that an applicant is a direct threat.52"

  4. We have been on the waiting list since 2009, i was notified almost 4 months ago that we were going to start receiving payments and we still have received nothing. Every time I call I'm told I just have to wait it's in the lawyers hands. Is everyone else still waiting?

  5. I hope you dont mind but to answer my question. What amendment does this case pretain to?