New law school admits first student

November 8, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Congratulations, Megan Marks! You’re Indiana Tech Law School’s first student. The law school announced Marks’ admission this week.

Marks is a 21-year-old psychology major at Purdue University and a native of Fort Wayne, where the Indiana Tech Law School will be located. She was admitted after applying through the school’s early binding decision admissions program. Those who applied through that program made Indiana Tech their first choice for law school.

In a release from the school, Marks says that she wanted to attend a law school near her home and where she wants to start her legal career.

Dean Peter Alexander said that Marks had strong credentials and “could probably attend” many other law schools in the region. He expects to receive “many more” applications like Marks’ in the coming months, according to the release.

The school didn’t say how many other students took advantage of the early binding decision admissions program. Indiana Tech Law School aims to have 100 students in its inaugural class, which will start classes in a new facility in August 2013.

I am not sure it is a coincidence that Marks is the first student admitted. It seems like good publicity to have that student be a Fort Wayne native, especially when trying to establish yourself in the state and region as a viable option for law school. Could Marks be an example of the typical Indiana Tech law student: one who is from the area and wants to work in Fort Wayne?
 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Great Idea
    This is fantastic news. In a mere 3 years Ind. Tech. will be pumping 100 new lawyers a year into the Ft Wayne market. How lucky for the Ft. Wayne community! Clearly, Indiana's 2 private law schools and 2 public law schools could not keep up with the demand for law grads in today's wonderful legal market. Congrats Megan! You are on the first step towards your legal career!!
    • Perfect timing
      It is the best of all possible times to be entering the legal profession. Just curious, but if the school never receives accreditation does Megan get her tuition back?
    • Congratulations
      I would like to wish her a sincere congratulations, without the sarcasm of the previous posts. The people of Fort Wayne are committed to education and are proud of their city. They are not afraid to look beyond the current upheaval in the legal market and plan for the future. Fort Wayne is a great community in which to raise a family and it only makes sense that Megan would want to take advantage of the chance to learn in the community in which she plans to practice. I have confidence that despite the elitists and naysayers the people of Fort Wayne will make this school a great place to learn the skills required to practice law in this century. Welcome home, Megan.

    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
    ADVERTISEMENT
    1. I wonder if the USSR had electronic voting machines that changed the ballot after it was cast? Oh well, at least we have a free media serving as vicious watchdog and exposing all of the rot in the system! (Insert rimshot)

    2. Jose, you are assuming those in power do not wish to be totalitarian. My experience has convinced me otherwise. Constitutionalists are nearly as rare as hens teeth among the powerbrokers "managing" us for The Glorious State. Oh, and your point is dead on, el correcta mundo. Keep the Founders’ (1791 & 1851) vision alive, my friend, even if most all others, and especially the ruling junta, chase only power and money (i.e. mammon)

    3. Hypocrisy in high places, absolute immunity handed out like Halloween treats (it is the stuff of which tyranny is made) and the belief that government agents are above the constitutions and cannot be held responsible for mere citizen is killing, perhaps has killed, The Republic. And yet those same power drunk statists just reel on down the hallway toward bureaucratic fascism.

    4. Well, I agree with you that the people need to wake up and see what our judges and politicians have done to our rights and freedoms. This DNA loophole in the statute of limitations is clearly unconstitutional. Why should dna evidence be treated different than video tape evidence for example. So if you commit a crime and they catch you on tape or if you confess or leave prints behind: they only have five years to bring their case. However, if dna identifies someone they can still bring a case even fifty-years later. where is the common sense and reason. Members of congress are corrupt fools. They should all be kicked out of office and replaced by people who respect the constitution.

    5. If the AG could pick and choose which state statutes he defended from Constitutional challenge, wouldn't that make him more powerful than the Guv and General Assembly? In other words, the AG should have no choice in defending laws. He should defend all of them. If its a bad law, blame the General Assembly who presumably passed it with a majority (not the government lawyer). Also, why has there been no write up on the actual legislators who passed the law defining marriage? For all the fuss Democrats have made, it would be interesting to know if some Democrats voted in favor of it (or if some Republican's voted against it). Have a nice day.

    ADVERTISEMENT