ILNews

Lectures discuss screening lawyers, e-lawyering

IL Staff
January 1, 2008
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The 11th annual Tabor Institute in Legal Ethics lectures featuring a bench and bar lecture and a public lecture will be April 24 at Valparaiso University School of Law. Both lectures are free and open to the public.

The bench and bar lecture, "Gatekeepers: The Role of the Law School and the Bar in Regulating Access to the Profession (A Reflection on Traffic Tickets, Microwaving Cats, and Spanking)," George Washington University Law School professor Theresa A. Gabaldon will explore the growing debate about the relative roles of law schools and the bar in screening prospective attorneys. The lecture begins at 2:30 p.m. in Tabor Auditorium in Weseman Hall, 656 S. Greenwich St., Valparaiso.

At 4 p.m. is the public lecture, "Virtual Virtuous Living: How Can the iGeneration of Lawyers Best Love and Serve its Neighbors?" In this lecture, Gabaldon will discuss the challenges presented by e-lawyering.

A public reception begins at 5:30 p.m. at Old Town Banquet Center, 711 Calumet Ave., Valparaiso. Attorneys interested in receiving CLE credits must RSVP by April 22; Indiana lawyers attending both lectures may receive 2 units of CLE ethics credit.

To RSVP, contact Lisa Todd at (219) 465-7893 or lisa.todd@valpo.edu. More information about the lectures can be found on the Valparaiso University School of Law Web site.
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
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I'm not sure what's more depressing: the fact that people would pay $35,000 per year to attend an unaccredited law school, or the fact that the same people "are hanging in there and willing to follow the dean’s lead in going forward" after the same school fails to gain accreditation, rendering their $70,000 and counting education worthless. Maybe it's a good thing these people can't sit for the bar.

  2. Such is not uncommon on law school startups. Students and faculty should tap Bruce Green, city attorney of Lufkin, Texas. He led a group of studnets and faculty and sued the ABA as a law student. He knows the ropes, has advised other law school startups. Very astute and principled attorney of unpopular clients, at least in his past, before Lufkin tapped him to run their show.

  3. Not that having the appellate records on Odyssey won't be welcome or useful, but I would rather they first bring in the stray counties that aren't yet connected on the trial court level.

  4. Aristotle said 350 bc: "The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of an modes of getting wealth this is the most unnatural.

  5. Oh yes, lifetime tenure. The Founders gave that to the federal judges .... at that time no federal district courts existed .... so we are talking the Supreme Court justices only in context ....so that they could rule against traditional marriage and for the other pet projects of the sixties generation. Right. Hmmmm, but I must admit, there is something from that time frame that seems to recommend itself in this context ..... on yes, from a document the Founders penned in 1776: " He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good."

ADVERTISEMENT