ILNews

Competing for a cause

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 

zoeller Zoeller

Through the end of March, Indiana law firms will be collecting donations for two charitable causes.

March Against Hunger, a statewide food drive to benefit Indiana’s food banks, offers a prize for top contributors in four categories: Large firm, medium-sized firm, small firm, and public/nonprofit firm. Now in its fourth year, the food drive is an initiative that Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller created.

“When I talk about it, I always mention two things – lawyers do have this mission to serve others, so there’s that part of this,” Zoeller said. “But the other is, you can’t deny that lawyers are very competitive. I’ve got a touch of it myself. I do think the competition – kind of a friendly rivalry – it does play off of that.”

On March 8, lawyers were preparing for another event that pits firm against firm: the Fight for Air Climb, which benefits the American Lung Association.

food-drive-15col.jpg At the Indianapolis office of Kightlinger & Gray, partner Libby Moss, receptionist Jennifer Rhorer and Director of Administration Jennifer Ellis (from left to right) have been working to generate donations for March Against Hunger. (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

Dan Long, of Frost Brown Todd, said that 2011 was the first year in which law firms competed against each other in the annual stair-climb, which this year was March 10. He explained that other firms were happy to participate in the event.

“At least in the Indianapolis area, we’re all very competitive, and one way to get lawyers involved is to tell them someone else can do it better, or to tell them they can’t do it,” he said.

Participants climb 35 flights of stairs in the Regions Bank Tower in Indianapolis once, twice or three times. Last year, Frost Brown Todd edged out Barnes & Thornburg to win first place among law firms that participated.

While Long appreciates the competition – and the bragging rights that come with winning – what appeals to him more is that law firms are among the top corporate contributors to the fundraiser.

“The thing what I like about this is three of the top five – Frost, Bingham, Barnes – are law firms,” he said.

For those less fortunate

When Greg Zoeller became attorney general in January 2009, he remembered that when he had been a deputy in that office, the Indiana State Bar Association had approached AG Steve Carter about promoting membership in the state bar.

Zoeller expected the ISBA would likely ask the same of him.

“I started to think about what I could go out and ask in return,” he said. He recalled reading about a food drive promoted by the Virginia State Bar Association and decided he wanted to implement a similar program in Indiana.  

fooddrivetrophy.jpg This traveling trophy went to Frost Brown Todd last year for winning the law firm competition in the Fight for Air Climb. (Photo Submitted)

“So, when members of the Indiana State Bar Association came and asked if I would help keep up membership, I said I would love to – and I asked if they would help with my program,” he said.

Since then, the ISBA and attorney general have worked together with Feeding Indiana’s Hungry to spread the word about March Against Hunger. The campaign encourages lawyers to contribute food and monetary donations for the state’s food banks. Unlike the previous three years, this year’s food drive will last the entire month of March, rather than two weeks.

Last year, Zoeller expanded the food drive to include firms in Ohio and Kentucky since food banks located on the other side of Indiana’s state lines serve some Indiana residents. Fifty law firms in Indiana and Kentucky participated, collecting more than 6,000 pounds of food and $27,574, which combined is the equivalent of 143,986 pounds (or 72 tons) of assistance.

South Bend’s Tuesley Hall Konopa won first place in the small firm category last year, raising $1,331 and 29 pounds of food. Partner Tom Hall explained that the competition was a natural fit for the firm because it already holds an annual Thanksgiving event to benefit the Food Bank of Northern Indiana.

When asked if the competitive nature of March Against Hunger helped motivate attorneys, he laughed, then said, “It helps, and we’re a little disappointed that we’ll have to go up against much larger firms this year.” Having added some attorneys since last year, the firm will be bumped up into the medium-sized ffood-drive-factbox.gifirm category.

Barnes & Thornburg was the first-place winner in large firm category last year, donating 1,031 pounds of food and $8,395. Robert Grand, managing partner of the Indianapolis office, explained that charitable giving has always been a priority for the firm.

“We have a lot of folks here that are involved in a lot of different things in the community, and we have had a long history of participating in those things – for instance, when the Bears were playing the Colts in the Super Bowl, we did a (drive) for who could raise the most for the food bank in our city,” Grand said.

Terre Haute firm Fleschner Stark Tanoos & Newlin took first place in 2011 in the medium-sized firm category, raising $3,126 and 310 pounds of food. The Department of Justice/Office of the U.S. Trustee in Indianapolis earned first place honors in the public/nonprofit firm category, donating $1,193 and 67 pounds of food.

Strength in numbers

Frost Brown Todd has four teams – 31 people – competing in the Fight for Air Climb including Park Tudor Kids, whose team captain is Long’s 12-year-old daughter.

Mike Limrick, captain of the Bingham Greenebaum Doll team, said 10 people from his firm will participate.

“I’ve been really surprised at the response and just the number of firms that are involved,” he said.

Taft Stettinius & Hollister is a corporate sponsor, and Long said Krieg DeVault is sponsoring a team.

Barnes & Thornburg is fielding teams for a “staff v. partners” challenge.

“Whatever they’re doing, it’s working for them – they have 20 more climbers than last year, and they’ve more than doubled what they raised last year,” he said. Still, Long wouldn’t mind holding onto the first-place traveling trophy this year.•

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The appellate court just said doctors can be sued for reporting child abuse. The most dangerous form of child abuse with the highest mortality rate of any form of child abuse (between 6% and 9% according to the below listed studies). Now doctors will be far less likely to report this form of dangerous child abuse in Indiana. If you want to know what this is, google the names Lacey Spears, Julie Conley (and look at what happened when uninformed judges returned that child against medical advice), Hope Ybarra, and Dixie Blanchard. Here is some really good reporting on what this allegation was: http://media.star-telegram.com/Munchausenmoms/ Here are the two research papers: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213487900810 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213403000309 25% of sibling are dead in that second study. 25%!!! Unbelievable ruling. Chilling. Wrong.

  2. MELISA EVA VALUE INVESTMENT Greetings to you from Melisa Eva Value Investment. We offer Business and Personal loans, it is quick and easy and hence can be availed without any hassle. We do not ask for any collateral or guarantors while approving these loans and hence these loans require minimum documentation. We offer great and competitive interest rates of 2% which do not weigh you down too much. These loans have a comfortable pay-back period. Apply today by contacting us on E-mail: melisaeva9@gmail.com WE DO NOT ASK FOR AN UPFRONT FEE. BEWARE OF SCAMMERS AND ONLINE FRAUD.

  3. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  4. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

  5. From the article's fourth paragraph: "Her work underscores the blurry lines in Russia between the government and businesses . . ." Obviously, the author of this piece doesn't pay much attention to the "blurry lines" between government and businesses that exist in the United States. And I'm not talking only about Trump's alleged conflicts of interest. When lobbyists for major industries (pharmaceutical, petroleum, insurance, etc) have greater access to this country's elected representatives than do everyday individuals (i.e., voters), then I would say that the lines between government and business in the United States are just as blurry, if not more so, than in Russia.

ADVERTISEMENT