ILNews

Members of the Class of 2017 start law school

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

About 872 people are expected to begin their legal studies this fall at law schools in Indiana.

As all five Indiana law schools welcome members of the Class of 2017, the deans at each school are touting the talents of the incoming students. The schools released enrollment numbers and LSAT scores but stressed the class sizes are preliminary and could change slightly.    

Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, the institution from which a majority of Indiana attorneys have graduated, is welcoming a class in the 270 range, including about 80 part-time students, according to Dean Andrew Klein.  

The incoming class is bigger than last year’s entering class of 230 but smaller than May’s graduating class of nearly 310.

“It’s a really, really strong group of individuals,” Klein said of the Class of 2017.

The median LSAT score for the incoming class is two points lower than last year, but the collective GPA remains strong between 3.3 and 3.4, Klein said. The school reports that 20 percent of the new students are people of color.

In addition, Klein touted the entering class’s yield rate – or the percentage of students who accepted offers from IU McKinney – of 50 percent, up from last year’s rate of 40 percent. The dean attributed the improved rate to the increased effort the law school has made to welcoming potential students.

Indiana University Maurer School of Law Dean Austen Parrish also praised the talents of the new law students coming to Bloomington.

The incoming class has approximately 188 students and a median LSAT score of 161. Last year, IU Maurer welcomed a class of 204 with a median LSAT score of 162.   

During the height of the recession, IU Maurer saw its incoming class size swell to 251 in 2010 and 242 in 2011. Parrish said the school is now aiming for smaller classes ranging between 180 and 190 students.

University of Notre Dame Law School is expecting more students this year. The incoming class is anticipated to reach 196, compared to 163 last year.

Dean Nell Jessup Newton noted the “rather high increase,” but said the South Bend law school has not set class size although it typically aims for a class of 180. Still, the institution has welcomed entering classes as big as 201 students.

The Notre Dame Class of 2017 has a median LSAT of 163, the same as last year’s class, and a median undergraduate GPA of 3.63, slightly higher than the 3.60 GPA of the previous year’s class.

At an alumni reception in Indianapolis, Valparaiso University Law School Dean Andrea Lyon talked optimistically about the school’s incoming class. About 188 students are expected with a collective LSAT score that is two points higher than last year’s class.  

Indiana Tech Law School is welcoming its second class of students and proceeding with the process to become accredited by the American Bar Association.

Interim dean andré douglas pond cummings said the incoming class will have about 30 students with a median LSAT score of 148. Students in this second class, he said, are coming from undergraduate institutions as diverse as Princeton University, University of Pennsylvania and Weber State University along with schools throughout Indiana including Ball State University, DePauw University and IU Bloomington.

The interim dean also said the law school’s accreditation application “looks excellent,” and an ABA team is scheduled to visit Sept. 14 through 17.
 

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. The $320,000 is the amount the school spent in litigating two lawsuits: One to release the report involving John Trimble (as noted in the story above) and one defending the discrimination lawsuit. The story above does not mention the amount spent to defend the discrimination suit, that's why the numbers don't match. Thanks for reading.

  2. $160k? Yesterday the figure was $320k. Which is it Indiana Lawyer. And even more interesting, which well connected law firm got the (I am guessing) $320k, six time was the fired chancellor received. LOL. (From yesterday's story, which I guess we were expected to forget overnight ... "According to records obtained by the Journal & Courier, Purdue spent $161,812, beginning in July 2012, in a state open records lawsuit and $168,312, beginning in April 2013, for defense in a federal lawsuit. Much of those fees were spent battling court orders to release an independent investigation by attorney John Trimble that found Purdue could have handled the forced retirement better")

  3. The numbers are harsh; 66 - 24 in the House, 40 - 10 in the Senate. And it is an idea pushed by the Democrats. Dead end? Ummm not necessarily. Just need to go big rather than go home. Nuclear option. Give it to the federal courts, the federal courts will ram this down our throats. Like that other invented right of the modern age, feticide. Rights too precious to be held up by 2000 years of civilization hang in the balance. Onward!

  4. I'm currently seeing someone who has a charge of child pornography possession, he didn't know he had it because it was attached to a music video file he downloaded when he was 19/20 yrs old and fought it for years until he couldn't handle it and plead guilty of possession. He's been convicted in Illinois and now lives in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better to give them a chance to prove to the community and their families that they pose no threat? He's so young and now because he was being a kid and downloaded music at a younger age, he has to pay for it the rest of his life? It's unfair, he can't live a normal life, and has to live in fear of what people can say and do to him because of something that happened 10 years ago? No one deserves that, and no one deserves to be labeled for one mistake, he got labeled even though there was no intent to obtain and use the said content. It makes me so sad to see someone I love go through this and it makes me holds me back a lot because I don't know how people around me will accept him...second chances should be given to those under the age of 21 at least so they can be given a chance to live a normal life as a productive member of society.

  5. It's just an ill considered remark. The Sup Ct is inherently political, as it is a core part of government, and Marbury V Madison guaranteed that it would become ever more so Supremely thus. So her remark is meaningless and she just should have not made it.... what she could have said is that Congress is a bunch of lazys and cowards who wont do their jobs so the hard work of making laws clear, oftentimes stops with the Sups sorting things out that could have been resolved by more competent legislation. That would have been a more worthwhile remark and maybe would have had some relevance to what voters do, since voters cant affect who gets appointed to the supremely un-democratic art III courts.

ADVERTISEMENT