ILNews

IBA Frontlines

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Baldwin Elected to Ogletree Deakins Board of Directors

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. has announced that Chuck Baldwin, the Managing Shareholder of the firm’s Indianapolis office, was elected to the firm’s Board of Directors. The election took place during the firm’s Annual Shareholders Meeting in Atlanta, Georgia on January 29. Baldwin’s legal career spans nearly 30 years and he has continued to progress in leadership roles since joining Ogletree Deakins in 2000.

Baldwin devotes his practice to representing employers in lawsuits and administrative proceedings involving EEO claims, ERISA claims, labor arbitrations, NLRB proceedings, wage and hour disputes, union avoidance, employment contracts, non-competition/trade secret disputes, and class and collective action litigation.

Gonzalez Joins Baker & Daniels

Baker & Daniels LLP has strengthened its environmental law team with the hiring of Cheryl A. Gonzalez. She will practice as an associate attorney in the Indianapolis office.

Before joining Baker & Daniels, Gonzalez served as legal counsel for the Indiana Department of Environmental Management. She provided legal guidance to the Office of Air Quality’s permitting, compliance and monitoring branches. Gonzalez also assisted in representing IDEM before Indiana’s Office of Environmental Adjudication, including appearing before OEA and in settlement meetings, drafting and reviewing briefs.

Legal Line Volunteers Make a Difference

A number of lawyers provided free legal advice to the public through the Bar’s Legal Line program in January. Dispensing wisdom and offering direction to callers were IndyBar attorney members Timothy Button, John Cento, Stephanie Chaudhary, Christine Douglas, Anthony Jost, Sarah MacGill, Jessica Moland, Phillip Olsson, and Donald Smith.

Reappointment for Hon. Anthony J. Metz

According to a press release from the court, United States Bankruptcy Judge Anthony J. Metz of the Southern District of Indiana has applied to be reappointed by the United States Court of Appeals to a new 14 year term when his current term expires on November 14, 2011. Comments are invited from the public and the bar as to whether Judge Metz should be reappointed. Those comments should be in writing and sent by March 1, 2011 to: Collins T. Fitzpatrick, Circuit Executive, 219 S. Dearborn St., Room 2780, Chicago, IL 60604

Bill Watch Provides Detail on Legislation of Interest

Bill Watch is a service of the IndyBar Legislative Committee. During each week of the legislative session, the IndyBar will distribute an updated report to its members that indicates the progress and recent actions taken on the bills being monitored by the association. The full report is posted online at Bill Watch on the Bar’s website, www.indybar.org

Voyles to be Honored with Buchanan Award

2009 Indianapolis Bar Association President James H. Voyles Jr. will be awarded with the IndyBar’s prestigious Hon. Paul H. Buchanan Jr. Award of Excellence at a luncheon in his honor on February 17, 2011 at the Hilton Indianapolis. Don’t miss this opportunity to honor an integral member of the Indianapolis legal community.

What’s Up at the Statehouse?

Hear an update on pending legislation and get to know Indiana legislators at the IndyBar’s fifth annual seminar, “The Importance of Lawyer-Legislators in the Indiana General Assembly,” which is hosted by the bar’s Senior Counsel Division. Attorneys who are state senators and representatives will lead a lively discussion during the luncheon on Tuesday, March 8, from noon to 1:30 p.m., at the Hyatt Regency, 1 S. Capitol Ave. This event is being offered for 1.5 hours CLE credit. For more information and to register online at www.indybar.org

Interested in Racing Law?

Mark your calendar...The Racing Attorney Conference (TRAC), a joint effort between the IndyBar and the North Carolina Bar Association, is returning to Indy on April 13 and 14, 2011. TRAC 2011, which will be held at the Conrad Indianapolis, will include topics on celebrity representation, non-profits and foundations, state and local governments and an in-depth focus on SAG/AFTRA, as well as multiple opportunities for socializing and networking. Visit www.racingattorneys.com for more information and registration details.

Bar Offering Prep for MPRE

Then don’t miss the IndyBar’s MPRE Review Course, coming up on Friday, February 18 from 1:30 to 4:30 p.m. at the IndyBar Education Center. Go to the Bar’s website for additional details and online registration. Can’t attend? Then select our convenient Home Study Option, which will provide you with all written materials as well as access to the live presentation in a virtual, online environment.•

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
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The $320,000 is the amount the school spent in litigating two lawsuits: One to release the report involving John Trimble (as noted in the story above) and one defending the discrimination lawsuit. The story above does not mention the amount spent to defend the discrimination suit, that's why the numbers don't match. Thanks for reading.

  2. $160k? Yesterday the figure was $320k. Which is it Indiana Lawyer. And even more interesting, which well connected law firm got the (I am guessing) $320k, six time was the fired chancellor received. LOL. (From yesterday's story, which I guess we were expected to forget overnight ... "According to records obtained by the Journal & Courier, Purdue spent $161,812, beginning in July 2012, in a state open records lawsuit and $168,312, beginning in April 2013, for defense in a federal lawsuit. Much of those fees were spent battling court orders to release an independent investigation by attorney John Trimble that found Purdue could have handled the forced retirement better")

  3. The numbers are harsh; 66 - 24 in the House, 40 - 10 in the Senate. And it is an idea pushed by the Democrats. Dead end? Ummm not necessarily. Just need to go big rather than go home. Nuclear option. Give it to the federal courts, the federal courts will ram this down our throats. Like that other invented right of the modern age, feticide. Rights too precious to be held up by 2000 years of civilization hang in the balance. Onward!

  4. I'm currently seeing someone who has a charge of child pornography possession, he didn't know he had it because it was attached to a music video file he downloaded when he was 19/20 yrs old and fought it for years until he couldn't handle it and plead guilty of possession. He's been convicted in Illinois and now lives in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better to give them a chance to prove to the community and their families that they pose no threat? He's so young and now because he was being a kid and downloaded music at a younger age, he has to pay for it the rest of his life? It's unfair, he can't live a normal life, and has to live in fear of what people can say and do to him because of something that happened 10 years ago? No one deserves that, and no one deserves to be labeled for one mistake, he got labeled even though there was no intent to obtain and use the said content. It makes me so sad to see someone I love go through this and it makes me holds me back a lot because I don't know how people around me will accept him...second chances should be given to those under the age of 21 at least so they can be given a chance to live a normal life as a productive member of society.

  5. It's just an ill considered remark. The Sup Ct is inherently political, as it is a core part of government, and Marbury V Madison guaranteed that it would become ever more so Supremely thus. So her remark is meaningless and she just should have not made it.... what she could have said is that Congress is a bunch of lazys and cowards who wont do their jobs so the hard work of making laws clear, oftentimes stops with the Sups sorting things out that could have been resolved by more competent legislation. That would have been a more worthwhile remark and maybe would have had some relevance to what voters do, since voters cant affect who gets appointed to the supremely un-democratic art III courts.

ADVERTISEMENT