ILNews

Attorneys find fit with new firms after Stewart & Irwin shuts down

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Connie Lindman and her team of intellectual property attorneys at former Stewart & Irwin P.C. in Indianapolis found a new home with room to grow. So did several other lawyers who’ve made smooth transitions with their practices.

In the case of Lindman and fellow IP lawyers Eric Lamb and Dennis Schell, it truly is a new home. The three are now partners in the Indianapolis office of Chicago-based SmithAmundsen LLC that launched in May. Lindman is managing partner of the Indy office with five attorneys, all Stewart & Irwin alums. She also chairs SmithAmundsen’s firm-wide IP practice.

apb-katzkorin02-15col.jpg Katz and Korin P.C. attorneys, formerly at Stewart & Irwin P.C., in their Indianapolis office. Seated are Marc Menkveld and Michele Henderson; standing are (L to R) Donn Wray, Glenn Bowman, Nick Gahl and Jim Brauer. (IL Photo/ Aaron P. Bernstein)

“We did have other options and we deliberately chose SmithAmundsen,” Lindman said of the IP team after the lawyers met with staff in Chicago and a satellite office that opened in the last couple of years in St. Louis. “We thought this would be a great opportunity to get in on the ground floor of the Indianapolis office of a great Chicago firm, and so far, everything has proven out to be that way.”

Keeping the IP practice together “made all the difference to us,” she said. “It was always understood that we would be going together as a team.”

As with SmithAmundsen’s St. Louis office, the company projects growth here and expects to quickly bring aboard additional attorneys. The St. Louis office previously had a focus on labor law, but that branch has evolved into a general practice.

Likewise, SmithAmundsen is concentrating its IP practice in Indianapolis, but Lindman believes the

local office will follow the lead of the St. Louis branch and diversify in short order.

Indianapolis seems suited to IP work, she said, and SmithAmundsen, ranked No. 248 in the National Law Journal’s 2013 survey of the largest U.S. firms, is well positioned to grow its Indy affiliate. “We do have a very robust IP community here in Indianapolis,” said Lindman, who has prior Chicago big-law experience with Kirkland & Ellis LLP, No. 11 in the survey.

“I think IP work is a growing area regardless of where you are, and we provide more excellent service at more reasonable prices than you are going to get on either of the coasts,” she said. “What’s nice about IP work is for the most part it is federal, so we can comfortably represent clients all over the country.”

In addition to the IP practice, corporate law attorney Alyssa Rogers and labor attorney Suzanne Newcomb moved from Stewart & Irwin to help SmithAmundsen plant its flag in Indianapolis. The firm is leasing temporary space in the Fifth Third Bank Tower until it identifies a permanent location.

Meantime, another group of former Smith & Irwin partners – Jeffrey Halbert, Ron Smith and Steve Sutherlin – moved to Bose McKinney & Evans LLP, where managing partner Jeff Gaither said they fit right in with Bose’s practice groups.

“We are always interested in discussing laterals, and conflict is one of the biggest barriers,” Gaither said. “There were very few conflicts with the three lawyers we ended up asking to join us.”

The partners at Stewart & Irwin entered Bose as partners, too. Halbert joined the labor and employment law practice; Sutherlin, a former head of the Indiana Securities Division, is a partner in the mergers and acquisitions practice; and Smith, who Gaither said “probably has represented more auto dealers than anyone in the Midwest in the last 30 years or so,” is chair of the automotive group.

“Their backgrounds and experience will be great assets to the firm and our clients,” Gaither said. He said other former Stewart & Irwin attorneys had joined Bose in recent years, making the transition natural.

smithamundsen04-15col.jpg Former Stewart & Irwin P.C. attorneys Connie Lindman and Dennis Schell (seated), and Eric Lamb, Suzanne Newcomb (center) and Alyssa Rogers are now practicing from SmithAmundsen LLC ‘s temporary Indianapolis office. (IL Photo/ Aaron P. Bernstein)

Katz & Korin P.C. added six former Stewart & Irwin attorneys to the firm, including new partners Donn Wray and Glenn Bowman. “It so happens the six of us here, almost to a person, have many, many longstanding friendships and professional associations here,” Wray said. “This has been a happy marriage from the get-go.”

Wray focuses on automotive and environmental representation, and Bowman is an experienced environmental litigator. Others who joined Katz & Korin – Jim Brauer, Michele Henderson, Nick Gahl and Marc Menkveld – bring environmental experience as well as medical malpractice and professional liability defense backgrounds.

“What I’m willing to do and wanted to do was work with a moderate-sized firm where we could become the environmental group,” Bowman said. “We can combine with what Katz & Korin already had and continue with the vision and goals that we as the environmental group (at Stewart & Irwin) had, and candidly, got sidetracked.”

Bowman said the move has been “wonderful,” noting that Katz & Korin recognized the value of Stewart & Irwin staffers and brought them aboard, too. Bowman and Wray also said their new firm has a far-superior marketing program.

newfirm-facts.gifIn another move, Cantrell Strenski & Mehringer LLP confirmed it added former Stewart & Irwin attorneys Cynthia Locke and Richard H. Riegner, but no additional information was available at IL deadline.

Katz & Korin partner Sally Zweig said the firm’s new additions will bolster its roster of litigators who will pair with existing transactional groups.

“Our firm has always been one where we have no aspirations to be the biggest firm in town,” she said. “When we bought the building, we did so with the idea of maintaining flexibility for opportunities as they might present themselves. This was an opportunity that presented itself, and (the former Stewart & Irwin attorneys) did offer some depth in practice areas that we didn’t have.

“This was a little bit of kismet, I guess I’d say.”

Zweig knows a bit about that, too, and what the former Stewart & Irwin attorneys may be experiencing. She was a partner at Johnson Smith, and when that firm dissolved in 2002, she joined some colleagues who moved to Katz & Korin.

“For a number of us here, obviously, it resonates,” Zweig said. “I always said about Johnson Smith, it was a great bunch of lawyers and everybody ended up in great places. Everybody was successful before and after, and it’s nice when that does work out.”

It was tough to leave a firm that dissolved “abruptly,” Zweig said, but for her and those who moved from Johnson Smith to Katz & Korin, “it was a good fit all the way around,” and she feels she gained from the experience.

“Personally speaking, I think it helps you think about from a career point of view and a personal point of view the kind of practice that would be most beneficial,” she said.

“It’s also the case that if you need to change, to know that you can is a good thing. And if you are just sort of thinking about changing, there’s not any stigma to it, and what would be a rewarding place to ply my profession?

“It was always my sense you should do what you like at a place you like doing it,” Zweig said.•

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. Applause, applause, applause ..... but, is this duty to serve the constitutional order not much more incumbent upon the State, whose only aim is to be pure and unadulterated justice, than defense counsel, who is also charged with gaining a result for a client? I agree both are responsible, but it seems to me that the government attorneys bear a burden much heavier than defense counsel .... "“I note, much as we did in Mechling v. State, 16 N.E.3d 1015 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), trans. denied, that the attorneys representing the State and the defendant are both officers of the court and have a responsibility to correct any obvious errors at the time they are committed."

  2. Do I have to hire an attorney to get co-guardianship of my brother? My father has guardianship and my older sister was his co-guardian until this Dec 2014 when she passed and my father was me to go on as the co-guardian, but funds are limit and we need to get this process taken care of quickly as our fathers health isn't the greatest. So please advise me if there is anyway to do this our self or if it requires a lawyer? Thank you

  3. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  4. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  5. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

ADVERTISEMENT