ILNews

IndyBar: Participating in the IndyBar Diversity Job Fair

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

By Roxana Bell, Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP

Upon saying goodbye to Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson after a two-year clerkship in her chambers, I handed her a framed clipping from the Aug. 1, 2012, issue of The Indiana Lawyer, which featured a photo of the two of us at the 2012 IndyBar Diversity Job Fair. The article holds special significance to me because I count the two summers we spent interviewing candidates together at the Job Fair among my fondest memories with her.
 

iba-p1017003-15col.jpg Attendees enjoy conversation and lunch together at the Diversity & the Law Luncheon, held in conjunction with the 2013 IndyBar Diversity Job Fair.

Since 2008, the IndyBar Diversity Job Fair has forged a tradition of fostering diversity and inclusion within the Indianapolis legal community. As a student-participant in 2010, I interviewed with seven employers, including Bingham Greenebaum Doll (then Bingham McHale), where I am now an associate, and the Office of the Indiana Attorney General, where I ultimately spent my 2L summer. I can remember each of those interviews well, not because of anything that was spoken, but because of the unspoken message those employers conveyed simply by participating in the Job Fairs. You are welcome here. We want to work alongside you. You would fit well with us. We are looking for someone like you.

Now, as a practitioner, when I reflect on my past experiences with the IndyBar Diversity Job Fair, it is clear to me where its greatest force lies: with the judges, law firms, and public agencies that demonstrate their support of diversity and inclusion by participating as interviewers, and the lasting impression they leave in the minds and hearts of those they take the time to meet.

If you have had the pleasure of participating in this event as a student, as an employer conducting interviews, as a sponsor, or event guest, I hope you will continue to show your support of diversity by participating again.  If you have not been a past participant, I encourage you to consider doing so this year in whatever capacity you may be able. You will meet talented students from an array of backgrounds who are eager to make Indianapolis their home community. You may even hire one of them (now, or in the future, like my experience with BGD) and gain a valuable asset for your firm or organization. However you choose to participate, your presence will signal your support for a diverse Indianapolis legal community and send a welcoming message to up-and-coming lawyers from all walks of life.

For more information about the 2014 IndyBar Diversity Job Fair, which will be held Aug. 21 and 22, 2014, please visit www.ibadiversityjobfair.org. I hope to see you there!

Ms. Bell is an Associate at Bingham Greenebaum Doll where she practices in the Labor and Employment Group. Before joining Bingham Greenebaum Doll, Roxana clerked for Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, and Judge Rudolph Pyle III of the Court of Appeals of Indiana. She is a member of the IndyBar Diversity Job Fair Committee.

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