Indiana Law School Briefs - 9/11/13

September 11, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Law School Briefs

Law School Briefs highlights news from law schools in Indiana. While Indiana Lawyer has always covered law school news and continues to keep up with law school websites and press releases for updates, we gladly accept submissions for this section from law students, professors, alumni, and others who want to share law school-related news. If you’d like to submit news or a photo from an event, please email it to Marilyn Odendahl at, along with contact information for any follow-up questions at least two weeks prior to the issue date.

Indiana Tech plans dedication ceremony for law school

Indiana Tech Law School will host a dedication ceremony and investiture of founding dean Peter Alexander on Sept. 14 at the Schaefer Center gymnasium on the school’s Fort Wayne campus.

Scheduled to speak at the event are Greg Zoeller, Indiana attorney general; Frank Easterbrook, chief judge of the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals; and Katherine Broderick, dean of the David A. Clarke School of Law at the University of the District of Columbia.

“We are very pleased that three distinguished members of the legal community will share the day with us,” Indiana Tech President Arthur Snyder stated in a press release.

The ceremony begins at 10 a.m. and is open to the public.

Indiana Tech Law School started classes Aug. 26.

Faculty talks will spotlightbooks by IU McKinney authors

The Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law will be hosting Faculty Book Talks during September to highlight the scholarship of the school’s professors. Each discussion will begin at 5 p.m. in the Wynne Courtroom with a reception to follow in the atrium, both in Inlow Hall, 530 W. New York St., Indianapolis.

Yvonne Dutton, associate professor of law, will present her book, “Rules, Politics, and the International Criminal Court: Committing to the Court,” Sept. 12. In her book, she examines the International Criminal Court, its ability to realize treaty goals and how its enforcement mechanism influences state membership.

David Orentlicher, professor of law, will discuss his book, “Two Presidents are Better than One: the Case of a Bipartisan Executive Branch,” Sept. 19. Orentlicher argues the concerns over the growing presidential abuse of power and how the toxic political atmosphere can be fixed by replacing the one person, one-party presidency with a two-person, two-party executive branch.

Each event is worth one hour of continuing legal education credit. For more information, visit and click on the events listing.

IndyBar seeking nominations for student executive board

The Indianapolis Bar Association Law Student Division is taking nominations for its 2013-2014 executive board.

Six at-large positions, three for 1Ls and three for 2Ls, along with one position each for students from Valparaiso University Law School, Indiana University Maurer School of Law and the University of Notre Dame Law School are available.

To be eligible, a law student must have at least two semesters remaining and be able to attend 80 percent of the board meetings. In addition, each student must submit an IndyBar nomination form and a short statement of interest.

Applications for board positions can either be emailed to secretary Amy McCool at or mailed to the IndyBar offices, 135 N. Pennsylvania St., Suite 1500, Indianapolis, IN 46204. The deadline is 6 p.m. Oct. 15.

Interested students do not need to be a current member of the IndyBar to apply. They can join the association as a Plus-Bar Review member when they apply for an executive board position.

For more information visit the IndyBar website at•


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. I commend Joe for standing up to this tyrant attorney! You ask why? Well I’m one of David Steele victims. I was in desperate need of legal help to protect my child, David saw an opportunity, and he demanded I pay him $3000. Cash. As I received motions and orders from court he did nothing! After weeks of emails asking him to address the legal issues, he responded by saying he was “on vacation “and I should be so lucky to have “my attorney” reply. Finally after lie on top of lie I asked for a full refund, which he refused. He then sent me “bills” for things he never did, such as, his appearance in the case and later claimed he withdrew. He never filed one document / motion for my case! When I finally demanded he refund my money he then turn to threats which scared my family for our lives. It seem unreal we couldn’t believe this guy. I am now over $100,000 in debt digging out of the legal mess he caused my family. Later I was finally able to hire another law office. I met Joe and we worked diligently on my case. I soon learn Joe had a passion for helping people. As anyone who has been through a legal battle it is exhausting. Joe was always more than happy to help or address an issue. Joe was knowledgeable about all my concerns at the same time he was able to reduce the stress and anxieties of my case. He would stay late and come in early, he always went the extra mile to help in any way he could. I can only imagine what Joe and his family has been through, my prayers go out to him and all the victims.

  2. Steele did more than what is listed too. He purposely sought out to ruin me, calling potential employers and then lied about me alleging all kinds of things including kidnapping. None of his allegations were true. If you are in need of an ethical and very knowledgeable family law paralegal, perhaps someone could post their contact information. Ethics cannot be purchased, either your paralegal has them or they do not.

  3. This is ridiculous. Most JDs not practicing law don't know squat to justify calling themselves a lawyer. Maybe they should try visiting the inside of a courtroom before they go around calling themselves lawyers. This kind of promotional BS just increases the volume of people with JDs that are underqualified thereby dragging all the rest of us down likewise.

  4. I think it is safe to say that those Hoosier's with the most confidence in the Indiana judicial system are those Hoosier's who have never had the displeasure of dealing with the Hoosier court system.

  5. I have an open CHINS case I failed a urine screen I have since got clean completed IOP classes now in after care passed home inspection my x sister in law has my children I still don't even have unsupervised when I have been clean for over 4 months my x sister wants to keep the lids for good n has my case working with her I just discovered n have proof that at one of my hearing dcs case worker stated in court to the judge that a screen was dirty which caused me not to have unsupervised this was at the beginning two weeks after my initial screen I thought the weed could have still been in my system was upset because they were suppose to check levels n see if it was going down since this was only a few weeks after initial instead they said dirty I recently requested all of my screens from redwood because I take prescriptions that will show up n I was having my doctor look at levels to verify that matched what I was prescripted because dcs case worker accused me of abuseing when I got my screens I found out that screen I took that dcs case worker stated in court to judge that caused me to not get granted unsupervised was actually negative what can I do about this this is a serious issue saying a parent failed a screen in court to judge when they didn't please advise