ILNews

Law School Briefs - 10/26/11

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Law School Briefs

Law School Briefs is Indiana Lawyer’s section highlighting news from law schools in Indiana. While IL 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 send it to Jenny Montgomery at jmontgomery@ibj.com, along with contact information for any follow-up questions at least two weeks in advance of the issue date.

IU – Indy lecture

Gerard Magliocca, Samuel R. Rosen Professor at Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis, will present a lecture on constitutional liability rules at 5 p.m. Nov. 8 at Inlow Hall, Wynne Courtroom, 530 W. New York St., Indianapolis. A reception follows at 6 p.m. in the Conour Atrium.

One hour of continuing legal education credit is available. The lecture is free and open to the public, and parking is available for a fee at the Gateway Garage, 525 Blackford St.

Magliocca joined the faculty at the IU School of Law – Indianapolis following two years as an associate with the international law firm Covington and Burling and one year as a clerk for Judge Guido Calabresi of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. Magliocca is also the author of the book, “Andrew Jackson and the Constitution: The Rise and Fall of Generational Regimes,” and “The Tragedy of William Jennings Bryan: Constitutional Law and the Politics of Backlash.”

Additional information about this event can be found on the school’s website: http://indylaw.indiana.edu/news/events.cfm?eid=464.

Supreme Court at Notre Dame

The Indiana Supreme Court will be at the University of Notre Dame Law School to hear arguments in the case of Jerrme Damar Cartwright v. State of Indiana, No. 82S01-1109-CR-564. The arguments will begin at 3:30 p.m. Nov. 14 in the Patrick F. McCartan Courtroom, 1170 Eck Hall of Law, Notre Dame.

Cartwright was convicted for attempted battery with a deadly weapon, attempted aggravated battery and possession of a handgun by a felon. The Court of Appeals reversed his conviction on grounds that the jury was selected unfairly.•

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT