Bar Crawl - 3/2/11

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Bar Crawl

ISBA, AG team up for 3rd food drive

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller and the Indiana State Bar Association have teamed up with Feeding Indiana’s Hungry for the third annual March Against Hunger food drive, which is scheduled for March 14 to 31.

The competition between law firms is to raise donations of money and nonperishable foods for Indiana’s 11 regional food banks.

“While there are some hopeful signs of an economic recovery on the horizon, for many in our state the harsh realities of unemployment and financial difficulties leave them desperate to buy the basic food essentials to feed their families. For the third year I am calling upon the members of my profession to step up and do what attorneys do best – serve the interests of others,” Zoeller said in a statement. “The food banks in Indiana are facing a critical shortage of supplies due to the increase in the need to help put food on the table of our fellow Hoosiers. I’ve been very proud of the past support by the many members of the ISBA, and I hope for greater support this year to meet the greater need.”

In 2010, Zoeller presented the Attorney General’s Cup to the highest donating firms in three categories. Barnes & Thornburg was the winner of the large firm division; Rubin & Levin placed first in the small firm and solo practitioner division; and the Office of the U.S. Trustee Indianapolis/Region 10 won the public/nonprofit division. This year’s categories will be the same, recognizing a winner in each category who collects the most donations.

Visit to sign up to participate in the 2011 statewide competition. Firms may sign up before the competition begins or anytime during the collection period. For more information, contact Michelle Mayer at the attorney general’s office at or 317-234-6668.

CLE focus on stress and social media

“The Attorney and Social Media & Stress Management for Attorneys,” which counts as three credits of CLE and one credit of ethics, will take place at 1 p.m. March 29 at The Summit Club, 211 W. Washington St., South Bend. The CLE will be followed by a reception.

Scheduled presenters are John Conway and Erin Linder of LaDue Curran Kuehn, and Genelle King of King Communication Resources.

The CLE will address how Indiana’s ethics rules apply to using social media such as LinkedIn, blogs, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and MySpace. These issues include: advertising and solicitation, investigation, and confidentiality.

Among these issues are: What constitutes advertising on social media sites and what is impermissible puffing? Are attorney profiles subject to the advertising rules? Can attorneys use social media as a discovery tool for information regarding parties, witnesses, and jurors? When is an attorney-client relationship created? How can an attorney protect his client from waiving the privilege?

The stress management portion of the CLE will focus on myths and facts about stress, what does it mean to be “stress hardy,” and effective ways to break negative stress cycles and enhance the quality of everyday experiences.

The fee includes the reception and refreshments. Cost is $75 for SJCBA members who are new attorney members, non-profit attorneys, and full-time government employees; $115 for all other SJCBA members; and $230 for non-members.•


Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Especially I would like to see all the republican voting patriotic good ole boys to stop and understand that the wars they have been volunteering for all along (especially the past decade at least) have not been for God & Jesus etc no far from it unless you think George Washington's face on the US dollar is god (and we know many do). When I saw the movie about Chris Kyle, I thought wow how many Hoosiers are just like this guy, out there taking orders to do the nasty on the designated bad guys, sometimes bleeding and dying, sometimes just serving and coming home to defend a system that really just views them as reliable cannon fodder. Maybe if the Christians of the red states would stop volunteering for the imperial legions and begin collecting welfare instead of working their butts off, there would be a change in attitude from the haughty professorial overlords that tell us when democracy is allowed and when it isn't. To come home from guarding the borders of the sandbox just to hear if they want the government to protect this country's borders then they are racists and bigots. Well maybe the professorial overlords should gird their own loins for war and fight their own battles in the sandbox. We can see what kind of system this really is from lawsuits like this and we can understand who it really serves. NOT US.... I mean what are all you Hoosiers waving the flag for, the right of the president to start wars of aggression to benefit the Saudis, the right of gay marriage, the right for illegal immigrants to invade our country, and the right of the ACLU to sue over displays of Baby Jesus? The right of the 1 percenters to get richer, the right of zombie banks to use taxpayer money to stay out of bankruptcy? The right of Congress to start a pissing match that could end in WWIII in Ukraine? None of that crud benefits us. We should be like the Amish. You don't have to go far from this farcical lawsuit to find the wise ones, they're in the buggies in the streets not far away....

  2. Moreover, we all know that the well heeled ACLU has a litigation strategy of outspending their adversaries. And, with the help of the legal system well trained in secularism, on top of the genuinely and admittedly secular 1st amendment, they have the strategic high ground. Maybe Christians should begin like the Amish to withdraw their services from the state and the public and become themselves a "people who shall dwell alone" and foster their own kind and let the other individuals and money interests fight it out endlessly in court. I mean, if "the people" don't see how little the state serves their interests, putting Mammon first at nearly every turn, then maybe it is time they wake up and smell the coffee. Maybe all the displays of religiosity by American poohbahs on down the decades have been a mask of piety that concealed their own materialistic inclinations. I know a lot of patriotic Christians don't like that notion but I entertain it more and more all the time.

  3. If I were a judge (and I am not just a humble citizen) I would be inclined to make a finding that there was no real controversy and dismiss them. Do we allow a lawsuit every time someone's feelings are hurt now? It's preposterous. The 1st amendment has become a sword in the hands of those who actually want to suppress religious liberty according to their own backers' conception of how it will serve their own private interests. The state has a duty of impartiality to all citizens to spend its judicial resources wisely and flush these idiotic suits over Nativity Scenes down the toilet where they belong... however as Christians we should welcome them as they are the very sort of persecution that separates the sheep from the wolves.

  4. What about the single mothers trying to protect their children from mentally abusive grandparents who hide who they truly are behind mounds and years of medication and have mentally abused their own children to the point of one being in jail and the other was on drugs. What about trying to keep those children from being subjected to the same abuse they were as a child? I can understand in the instance about the parent losing their right and the grandparent having raised the child previously! But not all circumstances grant this being OKAY! some of us parents are trying to protect our children and yes it is our God given right to make those decisions for our children as adults!! This is not just black and white and I will fight every ounce of this to get denied

  5. Mr Smith the theory of Christian persecution in Indiana has been run by the Indiana Supreme Court and soundly rejected there is no such thing according to those who rule over us. it is a thought crime to think otherwise.