ILNews

Leadership in Law 2013: Gary R. Roberts

Dean, Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, Indianapolis Stanford Law School

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 

gary-roberts01-15col.jpg (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

Gary R. Roberts’ six-year tenure at the law school has been called transformational, with the most obvious sign the renaming of the Indianapolis school in 2011 after $24-million donor Robert H. McKinney. Gary has also overseen the addition of 15 faculty members and a doubling of the student financial aid budget. The nationally recognized sports law expert teaches several classes at the school, including labor law and, of course, sports law. Despite his demanding schedule, he has immersed himself in the legal community and community-at-large. He often attends Indianapolis Bar Association board meetings, bar retreats and events. He dedicates time to several community organizations, including the International School of Indiana and the Indianapolis Humane Society.

If you could take a sabbatical from the law for a year to work your fantasy job, what job would you choose?
Commissioner of Major League Baseball.

If you could meet and spend a day with one lawyer from history, who would it be and why?
Bill Clinton, because he seems to enjoy life to the fullest every day in every sense of the word.

What class in law school did you find the most difficult?
I really didn’t find any class to be that difficult. I loved law school, but perhaps it’s just been so many years ago that I can’t remember. Like the song says, “What’s too painful to remember we simply choose to forget.”

What civic cause is the most important to you?
The Indianapolis Humane Society. (I’m on its board.) I truly love animals, especially dogs, and cannot imagine why people are neglectful or cruel to them.

You’re a leading expert in sports law. What’s your favorite sport to watch?
This is a tough one. I’d like to say curling (at least it’s the most amusing), but really it’s probably either NFL football or college basketball.

In life or law, what bugs you?
Hands down, stop and go lights. I’d publicly like to tar and feather the fools who time those lights and who leave them operating all hours of the day and night when there is almost no traffic. A close second is the bureaucracy within Indiana University that creates unnecessary hurdles, delays, and paperwork for almost everything one tries to do.

What do you find scary?
Professor Jegen.

Would a world without 24/7 technology be a good or bad thing?
A bad thing. As frustrating (and even scary) as it can be sometimes, technology has made our lives so much richer and allowed us to do and learn so many more things than would be conceivable without it.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. He TIL team,please zap this comment too since it was merely marking a scammer and not reflecting on the story. Thanks, happy Monday, keep up the fine work.

  2. You just need my social security number sent to your Gmail account to process then loan, right? Beware scammers indeed.

  3. The appellate court just said doctors can be sued for reporting child abuse. The most dangerous form of child abuse with the highest mortality rate of any form of child abuse (between 6% and 9% according to the below listed studies). Now doctors will be far less likely to report this form of dangerous child abuse in Indiana. If you want to know what this is, google the names Lacey Spears, Julie Conley (and look at what happened when uninformed judges returned that child against medical advice), Hope Ybarra, and Dixie Blanchard. Here is some really good reporting on what this allegation was: http://media.star-telegram.com/Munchausenmoms/ Here are the two research papers: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213487900810 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213403000309 25% of sibling are dead in that second study. 25%!!! Unbelievable ruling. Chilling. Wrong.

  4. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  5. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

ADVERTISEMENT