Tailgating with CLE

September 14, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Grilling, drinking, socializing with friends – these things go along with tailgating before football games. At one Indiana law school, CLE classes are also part of the mix.

At Notre Dame Law School, two-credit CLE programs are offered before select home football games. If you can pull yourself away from tailgating for a couple hours, the programs run from 8 to 10 a.m. and include a continental breakfast at 7:30 a.m. A look at the upcoming schedule shows topics on intercollegiate athletics, issues in professional sports, and the law of death and dying today.

For 75 bucks, you get a breakfast and CLE credit; but there’s more! Participants – attorneys, graduates, and non-graduates of the Notre Dame Law School – can purchase two football tickets. Being Notre Dame football, of course supplies are limited, as tickets to their games are usually highly coveted.

Several friends of mine went to college at Notre Dame and I know how rabid ND fans can be. Tickets used to be pretty hard to come by, so I wonder how many alumni and fans take advantage of the programs to score football tickets.

Check out Notre Dame Law School’s site about the continuing legal education for more info on the dates and programs.
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
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT