ILNews

IU Maurer gifted $3.25M for clinical endowed chair, scholarships

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana University Maurer School of Law announced gifts of $3.25 million to establish an endowed clinical professorship and provide scholarship funds for Indiana high school graduates attending the law school.

Glenn Scolnik, a 1978 graduate of the law school, and his wife, Donna, made a $2 million gift to establish the Glenn and Donna Scolnik Clinical Chair, to be held by the director of the Conservation Law Center. It’s the first endowed chair for an IU clinical law professor.

Led by professor W. William Weeks, a 1979 law school alum, the Conservation Law Center provides legal counsel without charge to conservation organizations, works to improve conservation law and policy, and offers law students clinical experience in the practice of conservation law.

Scolnik is chairman of Hammond, Kennedy, Whitney & Company Inc., a private capital firm based in Indianapolis. He has served on the Conservation Law Center’s board of directors since 2006 and recently completed a term as president of the law school’s board of visitors. Scolnik is a member of the law school’s Academy of Law Alumni Fellows.

Separately, Kathleen Harrold has given $1.25 million to endow the Bernard Harrold Endowed Scholarship, which will provide full tuition to a third-year law student each year. The scholarship will be awarded to an Indiana-resident student with demonstrated financial need who is in the top 25 percent of the class. The gift supplements a previous $300,000 gift that will be used for annual scholarship awards until the funds are depleted.

The scholarship honors Kathleen Harrold’s late husband, Bernard E. “Bernie” Harrold, LLB 1951, a founding partner of the Chicago firm Wildman, Harrold, Allen & Dixon (now Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP). Bernie Harrold was a distinguished medical malpractice defense lawyer and mentor to young lawyers throughout his career, many of whom graduated from the Maurer School of Law. He was also a veteran of World War II, serving in the U.S. Army Antitank Company, 333rd Infantry Regiment, 84th Division, known as the Railsplitters Division because its members hailed primarily from the Lincoln states: Illinois, Indiana and Kentucky. Harrold was a member of the law school’s Academy of Law Alumni Fellows.

“We are honored and delighted by these generous gifts,” said Austen L. Parrish, dean of the law school and the James H. Rudy professor of law. “The center not only provides our students a tremendous up-close view of what it’s like to practice law, but also shows how public service is an important part of a professional career. The Scolnik Chair will be instrumental in allowing the Conservation Law Center to continue this important work.”

Parrish noted more than 90 percent of the Maurer students receive scholarships, with an average annual grant of nearly $25,000.

“Gifts such as Mrs. Harrold’s help us make an outstanding legal education affordable to our students, and we are deeply grateful,” he said. “As a result of recent alumni generosity, the cost of attending the law school has been reduced.” Parrish said the average debt for the class of 2014 was approximately 14 percent below that of the prior year’s class.

Parrish said the school’s annual fund, the Fund for Excellence, received $1.2 million in unrestricted gifts for the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2014, the highest in five years and a 23 percent increase since 2010. Faculty gifts to the Fund for Excellence in 2014 reached an all-time high of 55 percent.
 

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