Recent Articles
DTCI: Perception and psychology shape interactions
June 5, 2013
Kevin Tyra takes a look at how how perception and psychology shape interactions in general, and interactions among adverse
lawyers in particular.
MoreDTCI: Who needs government? Maybe we do!
May 11, 2011
When I got out of bed this morning, a Tea Party activist on the morning news was decrying government intrusion into our lives
and our freedom. He seemed to be saying that our lives would be so much better without government getting in our way and getting
in the way of businesses trying to make our lives better through the free market system.
MoreDTCI: Decisons encourage comparative fault arguments
May 12, 2010
As Jerry Padgett and I discussed in our commentary, “Causation as a case-dispositive issue”
(Indiana Lawyer, Oct. 14, 2009), the Indiana Court of Appeals has held in favor of summary judgment for defendants
in instances in which the plaintiff’s negligence clearly intervened whatever fault may have been assigned to the defendant.
MoreSponsored by
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
Indiana Lawyer on Facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
The court of appeals not only tries to rewrite or interpret the law to suit their fancy, now they choose play stupid as well. Every consideration must be given to pro se litigants, who are not held to the same standards as attorneys, as stated by,SCOTUS. I assume they didn't have a lawyer, since one wasn't mentioned and I strongly suggest thatb the rest of the, origional petitioners get back in there and fight for their rights.
the irony of situations like this is that the clients whom conour cheated are the ones who should be pulling hardest for him to remain free and keep his law license, so they have some hopes of him paying back. really bury the guy deep and then there will be little hope of restitution
Qualified immunity, means that if you wear a badge, you are exempt from law and free to do anything you please! The courts will back badge toting individuals, because they think they are above the law as well. They think, they have judicial immunity, they do not.
Deeply, deeply concerned? I'll bet if it was the judge's money that had been swindled we'd see deep concern with actual consequences. First a Ponzi scheme, then a shell game with the assets…c'mon, hasn't Conour abused the judicial system and his clients long enough? I say enough already.
Wow, just wow.