Collections: 
0-9 | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

[4]

Part of Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees

item | thumbnails | details | text | pdf
Download this image
-4- is full compliance with the Governing Regulations of this University and with the standards of the Association of American Law Schools. The petition was immediately duplicated and copies were mailed to the members of the Board of Trustees that same afternoon. Since the Board members had read the petition from the law professors which gave in detail the grounds upon which they based their request as stated above, President Singletary said he wished to respond to the various points made in the petition. He outlined his own involvement in the search procedure as follows: (1) the appointment of the Search Committee; (2) a conference he had had with four of the six persons signing the petition; (3) his instructions to the Search Committee at its first meeting; (4) the final recommendation from the committee to him; (5) his offer of the position to Professor Lewis, his acceptance and subsequent appointment; and (6) the receipt of the petition now before the Board. Since his contact with the committee had consisted only of the initial meeting and the final meeting, he asked that the three faculty members on the committee describe for the Board members the procedures which had been followed, particularly as they related to Dr. Lewis. Professor Oberst, Chairman of the committee, explained the manner in which names of possible candidates had been sought which included both written and oral requests for suggestions from members of the Law faculty, advertisements in the Chronicle for Higher Education and consultations with knowledgeable persons in the law world. The committee identified five persons with superior qualifications and Dr. Lewis was one of the five. They determined his interest in the position and arranged for him to come to the campus for meetings with faculty, students, and administrators. Professor Campbell who made the plans for Professor Lewis' visit reported that arrangements were made for at least two meetings with Professor Lewis - one formal meeting, and one informal meeting. Professor Matthews reviewed Dr. Lewis' excellent qualifications for the position, indicated that there was significant faculty consultation and further stated that the claims against the President were unfounded, in fact or other- wise. He continued that, following Professor Lewis' visit, the committee contacted the other four persons identified by the committee and found that none of the four was interested. It then became the committee's responsibility to decide whether to recommend Dr. Lewis to the President or start all over again, which would probably mean that an acting dean would have to be appointed. The committee decided to go to the President with the single recommendation of Dr. Lewis who was eminently well qualified in the comnmittee's judgment. President Singletary said that he wished to have read into the record a letter, signed by 16 of the 25 members of the Law College faculty, endorsing Dr. Lewis' appointment. The letter is included at the end of the Minutes.