ILNews

Applicants sought for $90,000 in grant funds

Rebecca Berfanger
January 1, 2008
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The Heartland Pro Bono Council, which serves Boone, Hamilton, Hancock, Hendricks, Johnson, Marion, Morgan, and Shelby counties in central Indiana, received a cy pres award of more than $65,000 late last year and the organization is looking to distribute the money in the upcoming months.

That amount, along with other funds the HPBC has received in cy pres monies in recent years - totaling $90,000 - will be given in one grant or multiple grants sometime after June 5, 2008.

Heartland is currently seeking applicants from organizations around central Indiana that would help to serve the legal needs of the poor through new or continuing programs. Click here to be redirected to the request for proposals, and the preliminary application form, due March 7.

Heartland Executive Director Laurie Boyd encourages applicants to call her directly if they have questions. She can be reached at (317) 631-9410, ext. 2267, or by e-mail, Laurie.Boyd@ilsi.net.

Once the proposals are reviewed, finalists will be invited to submit a full grant application. These requests will be sent March 31. Applicants who receive invitations to submit full grant applications will have until May 9 to return their full grant application. The board is scheduled to meet June 5 and announce the grantees following that meeting.

"We're looking to find innovative ideas," said Heartland treasurer Sheila Jenkins.

Applicants must also show sustainability of their proposed programs, with the understanding that this is a one-time gift; there is no guarantee Heartland will receive more cy pres awards in the future.

Cy pres, which means "near to" in Latin, is an award that is made up of funds that are not distributed to parties in a class action lawsuit because not all parties in the class can be located. Either both sides agree or a judge decides who will receive the cy pres award.

In this instance, a case in the U.S. District Court for the District of Northern Indiana, Darrell Bruce v. Grieger's Motor Sales, Inc. and Capital One Auto Finance, No. 2:05-CV-230, Bruce and other plaintiffs in the class action had received a notice in the mail about how their credit revealed that they could get auto loans.

In the class settlement agreement, dated Nov. 21, 2006, defendants were to pay the sum of $313,947.50. The cy pres money was granted in an order from the court, signed by Judge Rudy Lozano and dated June 13, 2007.

In the defendants' report on the distribution of settlement funds, dated Sept. 10, 2007, including checks that were uncashed and undeliverable, along with $24.67 in excess funds in the account, the cy pres amount came to a grand total of $65,787.07. The check to the cy pres recipient, HPBC, was received Aug. 24, 2007.

To learn more information, read the story about the grant in Jan. 23-Feb. 5, 2008, edition of the Indiana Lawyer.
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. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  2. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  3. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  4. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

  5. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

ADVERTISEMENT