ILNews

Law school’s environmental symposium features senior adviser to EPA

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law’s sixth annual spring environmental symposium on March 1 includes keynote speaker Cameron Davis, a longtime advocate for Great Lakes conservation.

Davis is senior adviser to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency administrator and Great Lakes Restoration Initiative counsel. He’s also the top official advising the EPA on the Great Lakes.

The symposium, which is from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., is broken down into five panels of scholars and experts. Panel one examines Great Lakes challenges and emerging legal frameworks; panel two explores the problem of invasive species and the Asian Carp; panel three investigates the emerging threat of shale formation hydraulic fracturing; panel four looks at community connections and human rights; and panel five offers lessons learned from international and comparative models.

Online registration for attorneys who want CLE credit is $100; general admission is $25; and there is no charge for online registration of I.U. McKinney students, faculty and staff. The symposium is in the Wynne Courtroom and Atrium in Inlow Hall, 530 W. New York St., Indianapolis.

Visit the law school’s website for more information or to register

ADVERTISEMENT

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