ILNews

New assistant dean at Indianapolis law school

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis has hired a new assistant dean for student affairs, the school announced Monday afternoon.

In his new role, Johnny D. Pryor advises students on academic and personal issues. He is a member of the law school administrative team and provides leadership for the Office of Student Affairs. He oversees academic advising, registration and records, state bar eligibility, student organizations, and other areas affecting the law student experience.

Since 2005, Pryor has helped hundreds of undergraduate students gain admission to some of the most selective law and graduate programs in the world. He served as director of post-graduate studies at Butler University, then he worked as senior assistant director of career services at Dartmouth College before joining the Indianapolis law school’s staff.

He has also served as a member of the steering committee of the Shortridge Magnet High School for Law and Public Policy in Indianapolis, a pipeline program for high school students with an interest in ultimately having careers in the legal profession.

After Pryor graduated from Indiana University Maurer School of Law in 2002, he served as an assistant Clark County prosecutor in Springfield, Ohio. He worked primarily in the civil division providing legal counsel to county boards, departments, and elected officials on areas of law such as employment, real estate, zoning, and contracts. In addition, he handled criminal matters ranging from adult felony cases to juvenile matters.

While in Springfield, Pryor taught law, literature, and critical reasoning as an adjunct instructor at his alma mater, Wittenberg University. He also served as a volunteer coach for the school’s first undergraduate mock trial team.

As a law student, Pryor served as a clerk to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in Washington, D.C., competed as a member of the Indiana University National Trial Competition team, and was later elected to the Order of Barristers.

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT