ILNews

Update: Professor who taught at Indy Law since 1977 dies

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Professor emeritus Henry C. Karlson, who taught criminal law at Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis for more than 30 years, died Monday of cancer.

Karlson, 67, started teaching at the law school in 1977, and retired in 2008. He continued to teach part-time after he retired. He was also a regular expert source for various media outlets in Indiana.

Prior to joining the law school, Karlson served eight years in the U.S. Army, where he served as a trial judge in Vietnam as a member of the U.S. Army Trial Judiciary. He also taught at the University of Illinois College of Law, where he received his J.D. in 1968, and LL.M. in 1977. He received his A.B. from the University of Illinois in 1965.

While at I.U. School of Law – Indianapolis, he taught criminal law, evidence, trial practice, and a seminar about child abuse.
He also co-authored a book on the subject of child abuse, wrote articles on the subject for a number of professional journals, and presented papers at more than 100 continuing legal education programs.

He was a member of a number of professional organizations, including the Association of Counsel for Children, the American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, the Order of the Coif, and was a former member of the Indiana Supreme Court Committee on Rules of Evidence, and the Board of Examiners of the National Board of Trial Advocacy.

“Henry Karlson was an important fixture at this law school for many years,” said Vice Dean Paul Cox, the Centennial Professor of law, in a statement the law school released.

“He was a teacher passionately dedicated to his students and passionately intent upon instilling in them dedication to the rule of law. He loved the law school, greatly contributing to its development and success. … He loved the law, greatly contributing both to its advancement and to the continuing education of the practicing bar. He was highly principled, and fearless in defending his principles. He was equally fearless in defending those he thought wronged. Henry’s passing is tragically premature. He will be greatly missed by his colleagues and his former students.”

Karlson is survived by his wife, Nancy; daughter, Elizabeth M. Karlson, who graduated from I.U. School of Law – Indianapolis in 2000; son, Henry C. Karlson III; and one grandson.

The viewing and funeral will take place Friday at Crown Hill Cemetery, 700 W. 38th St., Indianapolis.  The viewing will start at 11 a.m., followed by the funeral service at 1 p.m., according to Elizabeth Allington, a spokeswoman for the law school. Instead of flowers, she added, the family has asked that donations go to the Hoosier Veterans Assistance Foundation, 964 N. Pennsylvania St., Indianapolis, IN 46204, or to a cancer charity of the donor's choice.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Henry Karlson
    Henry was an unforgetable professor who cared about his students. I wish I had understood half of what he said! A very accomplished and smart gentleman of the first order. I am sorry to see him go.
  • Henry Karlson
    Henry was a great Trial Advocacy professor. His passion & incisive analytical mind were inspiring to students. He was also an outspoken weirdo. I'll miss him.

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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT