ILNews

Top Lilly attorney leaving to become college president

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Alecia DeCoudreaux, the top attorney for Eli Lilly and Co.’s U.S. unit, will leave to become president of Mills College, the Oakland, Calif.-based school announced Thursday.

DeCoudreaux, 55, has worked at Indianapolis-based Lilly for 30 years after earning her law degree from Indiana University Maurer School of Law. As general counsel for its U.S. business, DeCoudreaux guided Lilly through all U.S. regulations, including its applications with the Food and Drug Administration to launch new drugs.

She has been prominent in the Indianapolis area through volunteer work, including serving on the boards of the Indiana University Foundation, the Economic Club of Indiana, Indianapolis Downtown Inc., the Capital Improvement Board, the Women’s Fund of Central Indiana and the women’s leadership council of the United Way of America.

DeCoudreaux also chairs the board of trustees at Massachusetts-based Wellesley College, her alma mater. She will step down from that position, but remain on the Wellesley board, before taking the helm at Mills. Like Wellesley, Mills is a  women’s college, but it also operates a co-ed graduate school. Its total enrollment is nearly 1,600 students.

“It has been my stated long-term ambition to fill a leadership role in women’s education,” DeCoudreaux said in a statement, adding “ever since my college years at Wellesley, I’ve maintained my passion for women’s education. I’m ready now to follow my passion, and that passion is what carries me into the academic world.”

DeCoudreaux will start at Mills on July 1, replacing Janet L. Holmgren. She will be the 13th president in Mills' 159-year history.

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

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. 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."

  2. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  3. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  4. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

  5. It's a capital offense...one for you Latin scholars..

ADVERTISEMENT