ILNews

Attorney-sponsored run will benefit two charities

Rebecca Berfanger
January 1, 2007
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
To benefit the Coalition for Homelessness Intervention and Prevention (CHIP) and the IU-Kenya partnership, Ron Katz of Indianapolis firm Katz & Korin will host his annual Ronnie's Rosh Hashanah Run & Walk on Labor Day, Sept. 3, in Carmel.

Each year, the run benefits two charities, and a check to the charity of the runner or walker's choice goes directly to the charity through Katz. This year the two charities are Indiana University Foundation (IU/Kenya Partnership), which focuses on HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention in Kenya, and/or CHIP, which is working to end homelessness in Indianapolis.

The run will begin at 9 a.m. at West Park in Carmel. The park is about 1/4 mile west of Towne Road on the north side of 116th Street. The course is about 5K. Participants are asked to respond to Katz by Aug. 22 along with their T-shirt size: XXL, XL, L, M, or S.

Katz' partners at Katz & Korin support this event by joining Katz in underwriting 100 percent of the costs associated with it.

The requested minimum contribution is $50 per person. One could write a check to each charity or a check to just one. Lower amounts for donations are also accepted for participants. Breakfast will be served following the run and walk.

Ronnie's Rosh Hashanah Run began as a way of commemorating the Jewish New Year (which will mark year 5768 on the Jewish calendar as the sun sets Sept. 12) by supporting organizations that excel in their mission of tikkun olam, repairing the world.

If you cannot participate but wish to contribute to the IU/Kenya Partnership and/or CHIP, mail check(s) to Katz: Ronald M. Katz, Katz & Korin PC, The Emelie Building, 334 N. Senate Ave., Indianapolis, IN 46204-1708.

For more information about the run, Katz can also be reached by his e-mail.
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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  2. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  3. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

  4. Why do so many lawyers get away with lying in court, Jamie Yoak?

  5. Future generations will be amazed that we prosecuted people for possessing a harmless plant. The New York Times came out in favor of legalization in Saturday's edition of the newspaper.

ADVERTISEMENT