ILNews

Attorneys donate record amount to food banks

Jennifer Nelson
April 27, 2012
Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Lawyers and law firms participating in this year’s March Against Hunger raised the equivalent of 135 tons of food, a record amount for the competition that’s in its fourth year.

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller teamed up with the Indiana State Bar Association and Feeding Indiana’s Hungry to create the friendly competition. Fifty-one legal groups from Indiana, Kentucky and Ohio competed to raise the largest amounts of monetary and food donations. Donations totaled 11,229 pounds of food and $51,172.

The competitors are separated into five divisions, with winners in each division receiving the Attorney General’s Cup. This year, Barnes & Thornburg won in the large division by collecting 946 pounds of food and more than $16,000.

Burke Costanza & Carberry in Merrillville won in the Medium Division by collecting 758 pounds of food and more than $4,000. Delk McNally in Muncie won the Small Division by collecting $800. Steven Douglas Law Office in Bloomington won in the Sole Proprietor Division by collecting 2,590 pounds of food and more than $1,100. The Vanderburgh County Prosecutor’s Office won in the Public/Nonprofit Division, collecting 1,211 pounds of food and more than $2,200.

“Lawyers are known for being competitive, and they have risen to the challenge of meeting the increased needs of the people of our state and also have helped elevate the public awareness of hunger in Indiana," Zoeller said.

Last year, 50 legal entities from Indiana and Kentucky collected more than 6,000 pounds of food and $27,574, which combined is the equivalent of 72 tons of food assistance.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Paul Ogden doing a fine job of remembering his peer Gary Welsh with the post below and a call for an Indy gettogether to celebrate Gary .... http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com/2016/05/indiana-loses-citizen-journalist-giant.html Castaways of Indiana, unite!

  2. It's unfortunate that someone has attempted to hijack the comments to promote his own business. This is not an article discussing the means of preserving the record; no matter how it's accomplished, ethics and impartiality are paramount concerns. When a party to litigation contracts directly with a reporting firm, it creates, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict of interest. Court reporters, attorneys and judges are officers of the court and must abide by court rules as well as state and federal laws. Parties to litigation have no such ethical responsibilities. Would we accept insurance companies contracting with judges? This practice effectively shifts costs to the party who can least afford it while reducing costs for the party with the most resources. The success of our justice system depends on equal access for all, not just for those who have the deepest pockets.

  3. As a licensed court reporter in California, I have to say that I'm sure that at some point we will be replaced by speech recognition. However, from what I've seen of it so far, it's a lot farther away than three years. It doesn't sound like Mr. Hubbard has ever sat in a courtroom or a deposition room where testimony is being given. Not all procedures are the same, and often they become quite heated with the ends of question and beginning of answers overlapping. The human mind can discern the words to a certain extent in those cases, but I doubt very much that a computer can yet. There is also the issue of very heavy accents and mumbling. People speak very fast nowadays, and in order to do that, they generally slur everything together, they drop or swallow words like "the" and "and." Voice recognition might be able to produce some form of a transcript, but I'd be very surprised if it produces an accurate or verbatim transcript, as is required in the legal world.

  4. Really enjoyed the profile. Congratulations to Craig on living the dream, and kudos to the pros who got involved to help him realize the vision.

  5. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

ADVERTISEMENT