ILNews

Attorneys collect $55k, 10k pounds of food in competition

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The March Against Hunger food drive competition among legal organizations in Indiana and Kentucky has raised the equivalent of 143 tons of food, the Office of the Indiana Attorney General announced Wednesday.

The 44 participating groups collected $55,455 and 10,655 pounds of food for local food banks. This is the fifth year for the food drive started by Attorney General Greg Zoeller, the Indiana State Bar Association and Feeding Indiana’s Hungry.

To encourage contributions, the AG’s office hands out trophies to the firms or organizations that collect the most donations in six categories. The winners this year are:
•    Extra Large Division – Barnes & Thornburg LLP (Indianapolis, Fort Wayne, South Bend, Elkhart) – 784 pounds of food and $16,190 in monetary donations
•    Large Division – Burke Costanza & Carberry LLP (Merrillville) – 1,675 pounds of food and $7,153 in monetary donations
•    Medium Division – Wilkinson Goeller Modesitt Wilkinson & Drummy LLP (Terre Haute) – $2,510 in monetary donations
•    Small Division – Tuesley Hall Konopa LLP (South Bend) – 29 pounds of food and $1,570 in monetary donations
•    Sole Proprietor – Steven Douglas Law Office (Elletsville) – $1,685 in monetary donations
•    Public/Non-Profit – Vanderburgh County Prosecutor’s Office (Evansville) – 2,295 pounds of food and $5,000 in monetary donations.

“As a fellow lawyer, I am particularly proud of the fact that lawyers from all corners of the state rose to the occasion to serve Hoosiers in need,” said ISBA President Daniel B. Vinovich. “It’s opportunities like this annual food drive that allow us to serve beyond our clients.”

Last year, the participating firms raised through monetary and food donations the equivalent of 135 tons of food. According to the AG’s office, the competition has raised nearly 1 million pounds in food donations since it was started in 2009.

 

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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT