ILNews

DTCI: New Officers Elected

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

At the November annual meeting of the Defense Trial Counsel of Indiana, the following officers were elected. They will assume office Jan. 1, 2013.

Jerry E. Huelat
2013 President of DTCI

huelat-jerry-mug.jpg Huelat

Jerry Huelat is a partner with the firm of Huelat Mack & Kreppein P.C., with an office in Michigan City. He is a member of the LaPorte, Michigan City, and Indiana State bar associations and is a member of the DRI. He is also a former member of the Ethics Committee of the Indiana State Bar Association. Mr. Huelat is the author of several articles and is a regular lecturer at insurance defense seminars.

James D. Johnson
2013 President-Elect

johnson-james-mug.jpg J. Johnson

Jim Johnson is a partner in the litigation department at Rudolph Fine Porter & Johnson LLP in Evansville. He was for many years the chair of the DTCI Amicus Committee. In addition to the DTCI, Mr. Johnson is a member of the Evansville, Indiana State, and American bar associations, the DRI and the Brooks American Inns of Court.

Thomas C. Hays
2013 Vice-President

hays-thomas-mug.jpg Hays

Tom Hays is a partner in Lewis Wagner LLP in Indianapolis. Mr. Hays focuses his practice on litigation and defense in the areas of tort law, product liability and commercial litigation. He is a member of the American Bar Association, Indiana State Bar Association, Indianapolis Bar Association, Georgia State Bar Association, DRI, International Association of Defense Counsel and the American Board of Trial Advocates. Mr. Hays served as the 2006 president of the Indiana chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates. In 2009, he was installed as Diplomat in DTCI; he received the Indiana State Bar Association’s Civility Award in 2005.

James W. Hehner
2013 Secretary

hehner-jim-mug.jpg Hehner

Jim Hehner is a member of Hehner & Associates LLC in Indianapolis. He frequently serves as a civil mediator and is admitted to practice in Indiana, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. For many years, Mr. Hehner was chair of the Trial Tactics section of DTCI. He is also a member of DRI.

Michele S. Bryant
2013 T reasurer

bryant-michele-mug.jpg Bryant

Michele Bryant joined Bamberger Foreman Oswald & Hahn LLP in Evansville in 1989. She was appointed several years ago by the Indiana Supreme Court to the Indiana Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program Committee, which provides assistance to judges, lawyers and law students who suffer from physical or mental impairments affecting their ability to practice law. She continues to serve on the JLAP Committee and also chairs the Evansville Bar Association’s Lawyers Assistance Committee. Ms. Bryant is a member of the International Association of Defense Counsel, the DRI and the American Health Lawyers Association.

Lonnie D. Johnson
Immediate Past-President

johnson-lonnie-mug.jpg L. Johnson

Lonnie Johnson is a partner with Clendening Johnson & Bohrer P.C. in Bloomington. He is admitted to practice in Indiana, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, and the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. Mr. Johnson is a member of the Indiana State and American bar associations, the Litigation Counsel of America and is also active in the DRI and Association of Defense Trial Attorneys.•

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