ILNews

IBA: Indianapolis Bar Foundation Awards Academic and Educational Scholarships

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indianapolis Bar Foundation recently awarded seven scholarships to both law students and to individuals preparing to take the Indiana Bar Exam in summer 2013.

Three academic scholarships were presented to assist students during their law school career. The following students received academic scholarships in 2013:

Rosalie F. Felton Scholarship: Michelle Langdon, student at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law

Hon. William E. Steckler Scholarship: Kelli Liggett, student at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law

Neil E. Shook Scholarship: Roya Parter, student at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law

In addition to these academic scholarships, four individuals received educational scholarships for the IndyBar’s summer 2013 Indy Bar Review course. IndyBar Review, the only bar exam preparation course offered by a bar association in the country, will prepare these individuals to sit for the Indiana Bar Exam in July 2013. Individuals receiving educational scholarships in 2013 are:

Christopher Gines

Andrea Kochert

Brandon Tate

Adam Willfond

The next scholarships to be awarded will be educational scholarships to be applied to the winter 2013 IndyBar Review course. Visit www.indybar.org to access application materials, which are due Nov. 1.

The Indianapolis Bar Foundation, the charitable arm of the Indianapolis Bar Association, is a community-focused leader of the local legal profession. The foundation’s ongoing grants and programs are maintained solely through the generosity and energy of its directors, fellows and donors. The assistance provided to students through IBF funded scholarships is a key component in the organization’s mission to advance justice and lead positive change in Indianapolis through philanthropy, education and service.•

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