ILNews

Indiana Tech's new law school will be on Ft. Wayne campus

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Tech officials announced Tuesday that the school will build a 70,000-square-foot, $15 million facility on its main campus in Ft. Wayne to house its new law school.

Since announcing in May 2011 that it was creating a law school, Indiana Tech has looked at locations in downtown Fort Wayne and on campus. Having the law school on campus gives law students more opportunity to interact with the rest of the university and take advantage of on-campus services and facilities, said founding law school dean Peter Alexander.  

He also pointed out that the law school will be close to downtown, allowing students and faculty to foster working relationships with the local legal community.

The law school plans to officially open in the fall of 2013 with an initial class of 100 students. The university wants to differentiate itself from existing law schools by using collaborative and experiential learning and emphasizing practical experience.

Students at Indiana Tech will be able to take courses in the MBA program or other graduate programs that would count toward degree completion in the law school, Alexander said.

Indiana Tech is a private school that has 11 campus locations throughout Indiana and one in Louisville, Ky. Alexander, who was named dean in December 2011, said he expects to have a full-time assistant dean for admissions selected in March, at which time student recruitment efforts will begin. Tuition is projected to be nearly $28,500 in the first year.

Construction on the new law school is projected to be finished by July 2013. A rendering of the school is available on Indiana Tech’s website.
 

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. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  2. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  3. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  4. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

  5. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

ADVERTISEMENT