5 Questions for Jean Brooks

December 5, 2012Duke Law News

Jean Brooks

Jean Brooks is the Director of Annual Giving, responsible for managing the Law School’s comprehensive annual giving program, including reunion fundraising, the class gifts and more. A Duke alum, she has spent many years on the campus.


1. Quick bio: Where is your hometown?

Newcastle, ME

2. What brought you to Duke Law School?

I graduated from Duke in 2000 and ended up working at the Law School by pure happenstance. I had no idea that 12 years later, I would have turned my first job out of college into a career.

3. What do you do for fun outside of work?

I am heavily involved in Duke Athletics, currently assisting with game day operations for football, and men’s and women’s basketball. However, over the years, I believe fencing and rowing are the only two Duke sports I have not either worked an event or written a press release for.

4. What is your favorite Durham restaurant and why?

Dame’s Chicken and Waffles. Um, it’s chicken and waffles.

5. Tell us something about yourself that otherwise we wouldn't know or guess.

I was an All-State flutist, but also played alto and tenor saxophone and French horn.

 

 

Other News
  • Economic Growth and Development in Africa

    Nelly Wamaitha LLM ’17, an attorney from Kenya, describes herself as a skeptic of foreign aid structures and delivery in Africa. “I don’t think Africa’s problems can be solved with some Herculean effort that Africa does on its own, it’s obviously going to be a cooperative effort,” said Wamaitha, who practiced corporate law in Nairobi and London and studied theology at Oxford University before coming to Duke. “That having been said, the world has really botched up Africa in the past.”

      
  • Keeping a critical eye on enforcement

    Decisions regarding the enforcement of laws are highly discretionary. The choice of a federal or state agency or attorney general to investigate, charge, litigate, or resolve a specific infraction of a statute or regulation or not gets little public, judicial, or scholarly scrutiny.