ILNews

Leadership in Law 2014: John C. Render

Shareholder, Hall Render Killian Heath & Lyman P.C., Indianapolis • Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, 1971

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
15col-Render.jpg John C. Render (Submitted photo)

If asked to name Indiana’s premiere health care attorneys, the name John C. Render is among those that top the list. John has been instrumental not only in the growth of the law firm that bears his name, but also in the development of local health care law and regulations. He spent 32 years as general counsel to the Indiana Hospital Association and was an adjunct instructor at Indiana University for more than two decades in its graduate program in health care administration. Students remember him as an influential instructor who was funny, had great stories and taught them a lot about the law. In fact, current Hall Render chairman William H. Thompson, a former student of John’s, was so influenced by him that he went to law school specifically to practice health care law.

If you couldn’t be a lawyer, what would you do for a living?

I probably would have taught. I started life as a high school English teacher and went to law school at night.

What was the worst or most memorable job you had prior to becoming an attorney?

I worked in the steel mills in Lake County for a time between a couple semesters of college. It reinforced in my mind that I didn’t want to do manual labor for the rest of my life. I wanted to earn a living with my mind and not my back.

Why do you practice in the area of law that you do?

Happenstance. I was in law school and I was teaching. One summer a friend went to work for the Indiana Hospital Association, called me up and said, “We are looking for someone.” They hired me for the summer. The next summer they called me back. I met their general counsel, and we got to know each other the second year. The president of the association and Mr. William Hall said, “We’d like you to stay here, and if you stay you can work for the Hospital Association and work with Mr. Hall in a clerkship situation.” I thought about it for five seconds, so I resigned from teaching and started working for the Hospital Association. When I graduated and passed the bar we started Hall Render in 1971.

How has health care law changed since you started?

It’s become an enormous industry. When I started it was a lot of hospitals, but it’s become such a multibillion-dollar industry in terms of both organizational aspects and demand for service. As more people are covered by insurance and public programs, demand has escalated. That, in turn, has grown our clients enormously, and as they have grown, we have grown, too.

What’s been the biggest change in the overall practice of law you’ve seen since you began?

One of the bigger changes is the proliferation of advertising with regard to trying to get clients. I am not convinced that it’s the right way to choose legal counsel or choose a cardiovascular surgeon because he has a billboard on (Interstate) 465. Law, medicine, all professions need to do a better job of informing the public about the people who are available to do work and provide services, their professional qualifications, etc. But I don’t think the professionals themselves are the best to provide that information. We all have a tendency to overstate our qualifications and talents. Me advertising on Lucas Oil Stadium does not make me the right lawyer to solve a problem.

We hear a lot about civility. Have you noticed a change in how attorneys treat each other since you began practicing?

It’s changed. I’m not sure if it’s a product of the profession or byproduct of society. I really think advertising has contributed to this. It has demeaned the profession in my mind, made us look like hucksters. There was a time when law and medicine were looked at as upstanding ethical professions. I think we still have those standards, but societal and other changes in the bar have caused a reduction in both civility and collegiality. I’m a believer that you can be collegial and can work with opponents and still zealously represent your clients. One thing I’ve learned and most lawyers will tell this, if you treat your opponents and their clients with courtesy and respect and still do the job vigorously, that client sometimes down the line will hire you. If answer is too long for print, cut highlighted section.

Why do you think people often have negative stereotypes about lawyers?

One of the major reasons is people come to lawyers mostly in situations of great trauma – personal or business distress, divorce, being sued, having criminal charge. If it doesn’t go right or they don’t get the right result, or think the lawyer charged too much or did too little, there can be a lot of negative feelings about that. You’ve got to be very effective and empathetic in dealing with people when they have legal problems. You may have seen this problem 50 times before, but it’s the most important thing in their life.


What’s something about you not many people know?

I like to occasionally bake things, mostly pies. One of my grandmothers, in an attempt to have me spend time with her as a little kid, taught me to bake pies.

What are some tips for achieving a work/life balance?

Whatever time you spend at the office, when you leave the office, don’t take it with you. I think when you leave, leave; and when you come back, do your work there. Whatever number of hours you put into the practice of law, you can fill. There is always something to do. If you want to put in 18 hours, there’s something to do.

What civic cause is the most important to you?

I admire certain charities a great deal like Salvation Army and St. Vincent DePaul and charities that minister to the poor.

Who is your favorite fictional lawyer?

Jake Brigance in “A Time to Kill.”

You’ve written many law review articles and contributed to papers on medical-legal subjects. What do you enjoy about writing?

I think it’s the component of teaching and scholarship. I’ve always enjoyed that kind of thing.

What’s something you’ve learned over the years that you wish you could go back in time and tell your younger self?

I would tell my younger self in high school and early college to be much more focused on academics and so forth. I was a good student, but I was just fortunate to be smart enough.

What class do you wish you could have skipped in law school?

Trust and estates and future interests. I never enjoyed that.

Is there a moment in your career you wish you could do over?

I’ve really enjoyed health law. I tell young people if you can find something to do that you really enjoy and make a living out of it, like I’ve been fortunate to do, your life is going to largely be very happy. I kind of wish I had been academically more focused early one, both college and law school, and been able to concentrate more on my studies. I, like a lot of people in both college and law school, had to work, so I never really felt like I had the full college experience, so to speak.

 

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. Actually, and most strikingly, the ruling failed to address the central issue to the whole case: Namely, Black Knight/LPS, who was NEVER a party to the State court litigation, and who is under a 2013 consent judgment in Indiana (where it has stipulated to the forgery of loan documents, the ones specifically at issue in my case)never disclosed itself in State court or remediated the forged loan documents as was REQUIRED of them by the CJ. In essence, what the court is willfully ignoring, is that it is setting a precedent that the supplier of a defective product, one whom is under a consent judgment stipulating to such, and under obligation to remediate said defective product, can: 1.) Ignore the CJ 2.) Allow counsel to commit fraud on the state court 3.) Then try to hide behind Rooker Feldman doctrine as a bar to being held culpable in federal court. The problem here is the court is in direct conflict with its own ruling(s) in Johnson v. Pushpin Holdings & Iqbal- 780 F.3d 728, at 730 “What Johnson adds - what the defendants in this suit have failed to appreciate—is that federal courts retain jurisdiction to award damages for fraud that imposes extrajudicial injury. The Supreme Court drew that very line in Exxon Mobil ... Iqbal alleges that the defendants conducted a racketeering enterprise that predates the state court’s judgments ...but Exxon Mobil shows that the Rooker Feldman doctrine asks what injury the plaintiff asks the federal court to redress, not whether the injury is “intertwined” with something else …Because Iqbal seeks damages for activity that (he alleges) predates the state litigation and caused injury independently of it, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not block this suit. It must be reinstated.” So, as I already noted to others, I now have the chance to bring my case to SCOTUS; the ruling by Wood & Posner is flawed on numerous levels,BUT most troubling is the fact that the authors KNOW it's a flawed ruling and choose to ignore the flaws for one simple reason: The courts have decided to agree with former AG Eric Holder that national banks "Are too big to fail" and must win at any cost-even that of due process, case precedent, & the truth....Let's see if SCOTUS wants a bite at the apple.

  2. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  3. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  4. Please I need help with my class action lawsuits, im currently in pro-se and im having hard time findiNG A LAWYER TO ASSIST ME

  5. Access to the court (judiciary branch of government) is the REAL problem, NOT necessarily lack of access to an attorney. Unfortunately, I've lived in a legal and financial hell for the past six years due to a divorce (where I was, supposedly, represented by an attorney) in which I was defrauded of settlement and the other party (and helpers) enriched through the fraud. When I attempted to introduce evidence and testify (pro se) in a foreclosure/eviction, I was silenced (apparently on procedural grounds, as research I've done since indicates). I was thrown out of a residence which was to be sold, by a judge who refused to allow me to speak in (the supposedly "informal") small claims court where the eviction proceeding (by ex-brother-in-law) was held. Six years and I can't even get back on solid or stable ground ... having bank account seized twice, unlawfully ... and now, for the past year, being dragged into court - again, contrary to law and appellate decisions - by former attorney, who is trying to force payment from exempt funds. Friday will mark fifth appearance. Hopefully, I'll be allowed to speak. The situation I find myself in shouldn't even be possible, much less dragging out with no end in sight, for years. I've done nothing wrong, but am watching a lot of wrong being accomplished under court jurisdiction; only because I was married to someone who wanted and was granted a divorce (but was not willing to assume the responsibilities that come with granting the divorce). In fact, the recalcitrant party was enriched by well over $100k, although it was necessarily split with other actors. Pro bono help? It's a nice dream ... but that's all it is, for too many. Meanwhile, injustice marches on.

ADVERTISEMENT