ILNews

Valpo grad lands sports law 'dream job'

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Valparaiso University School of Law 2006 graduate who participated in the school's Sports Law Clinic, including the clinic's work in Turin, Italy, during the 2006 Winter Olympics, will begin work with the United States Anti-Doping Agency in Colorado Springs, Colo., March 10.

As director of legal affairs for the USADA, Stephen A. Starks will prosecute doping cases against Olympic athletes as well as handle day-to-day matters in USADA's legal office as the "No. 2 of two" lawyers in the office of general counsel. He said he will also be working diligently to get up to speed before the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing.

He is one of the first students of the clinic - started during the 2005-06 school year - to accept a full-time job in sports law with a sports agency.

Starks will remain with Bose McKinney & Evans in Indianapolis until Feb. 29. Prior to his work in private practice, Starks fulfilled a one-year clerkship with Indiana Supreme Court Justice Theodore R. Boehm.

As a law student, Starks wrote the brief and argued the case for the athlete in USADA vs. George Hartman in 2006. He argued before the American Arbitration Association against USADA's then-general counsel and current CEO Travis Tygart and Bill Bock, the current USADA general counsel.

In an April 2007 interview for a May 2-15, 2007, Indiana Lawyer article, "Team assists athletes," Starks expressed an interest in pursuing sports law.

"My dream is to get into sports law, but as a young lawyer you take the opportunities that are presented to you. So you get with a reputable firm and get involved with clients they have who have a sports interest," Starks said.

Recently, Tygart personally called Starks to officially offer him the job in their legal department.

"It's unique to get an opportunity from the CEO who has had your position," Starks said Feb. 22. "The learning curve is going to be so steep ... you can't ask to be in a better position as far as (having a CEO as a mentor). Very few positions are recruited by the head man."

While Starks said the firm has been "tremendously supportive," he will miss his work in Indianapolis. With parents living in Fort Wayne, he plans to keep up with his Indiana connections, including his Indiana law license.

"Unfortunately, (taking this job) means I have to leave what I consider to be the best firm in our state so quickly," he said. "It is a dream job to be involved with sports not just as far as doing legal work but to also work for a sports entity. I think getting a job with USADA epitomizes that dream."

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. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT