Indiana Tech Law School shows new building to community

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Tech Law School recently held a series of open houses to give professors, lawyers and community members a peek inside its new building.

Constructed especially to house the law school, the three-story building sits on the Indiana Tech’s main campus in Fort Wayne. Large windows flood the interior with natural light and many soft-seating areas fill the open spaces.

in-tech-library-15col.jpgIndiana Tech Law School’s new 70,000-square-foot building (top) sits on the school’s Fort Wayne campus. Its courtroom (center) is positioned in a rounded space and includes seating on the second level. The law library (bottom) spans three floors. (IL Photos/ Kelly Lucas)

“We want teaching and learning to go on everywhere in the building, not just in a classroom or in an office,” said Dean Peter Alexander.

The central atrium flows into the courtroom which has been built in a round space. On the back wall hangs the large silver seal of Indiana Tech. Underneath is the bench with room for five judges and two witnesses.

Gallery seats are wrapped around in a semi-circle with the jury box filling the first two rows. On the second level, additional seating circles the courtroom.

The second and third floors contain the classrooms and faculty offices.

Spanning all three levels is the law library. The first and second levels house the materials while the third level includes a large student study area situated above the courtroom.

Classes at Indiana Tech, the state’s fifth law school, are scheduled to begin Aug. 26 with orientation starting Aug. 21. The inaugural class is expected to have 30 students, below the school’s original goal of 100.

Students are coming from across the United States, with a majority arriving from outside the Fort Wayne area. The school visited 109 pre-law programs and recruited in an area bounded by Des Moines, Iowa; Jackson, Miss.; Harrisburg, Pa.; and the upper peninsula of Michigan.

The new building has the capacity for 350 students or separate classes of 110 to 115 students each. It also has 28 faculty offices with full-time faculty expected to eventually fill 21 offices and the reminder being used by visiting and adjunct professors.

“We want to make sure the building is always comfortable, and the wide-open feeling you feel when no one is in the building is the same as when we’re at capacity,” Alexander said.•


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?