Recent Articles

Judge dismisses bulk of Christ Church suit against JPMorgan

May 22, 2015
A federal judge on Thursday dealt a major blow to Christ Church Cathedral’s lawsuit charging JPMorgan Chase & Co. caused $13 million in losses in trust accounts endowed decades ago by Eli Lilly Jr. via “intentional mismanagement” and “self-dealing.”

Judge, attorney credited for robust recovery for victims of securities fraud

May 1, 2015
The more than 90 investors who lost $9.7 million in a securities fraud perpetrated by Fishers hedge fund manager Keenan Hauke will recover about 33 percent of their losses - a far better outcome than is typical in cases of its kind.

Lawsuit: Angie's List manipulates ratings to lift advertising

March 24, 2015
A new federal lawsuit takes aim at Angie’s List Inc. on a new front, charging that it manipulates consumer reviews, ratings and search results in the interest of extracting more advertising revenue from service providers.

Appeals court affirms all but 2 of Durham's convictions

September 5, 2014
A federal appeals court in Chicago has upheld all but two of the 25 felony convictions for Tim Durham and two other Fair Finance Co. executives found guilty two years ago of carrying out a $200 million Ponzi scheme.

Behind the News: Lawsuit over Simon’s bonus may expose board’s mindset

March 27, 2013
The $120 million retention bonus that Simon Property Group Inc.’s board awarded David Simon two years ago has spawned a bitter legal battle in Delaware that promises to shed fascinating light on the inner workings of the board.

Small law firm sees faith in class-action suit pay off

October 24, 2012
A federal judge appears likely to approve the largest class-action settlement ever to come out of a local court, and DeLaney & DeLaney, a small Indianapolis law firm that helped press the case, is poised to profit handsomely.

Behind the News: '80s anti-takeover law helped sow Emmis win in court

September 26, 2012
Emmis Communications Corp.’s tactics as it plotted to strip preferred shareholders of their rights were “admittedly unusual,” Judge Sarah Evans Barker acknowledged in her Aug. 31 ruling that let the company go forward with a shareholder vote a few days later that did just that.

Attorney fees eat up most of recovered Fair Finance funds

July 4, 2012
A New York firm is contacting Fair Finance Co. investors seeking to purchase their bankruptcy claims – a sign that investors in the defunct business could secure a sizable recovery.

Behind the News: Vaunted attorney Conour has lots of explaining to do

May 23, 2012
A large question looms in the wake of the April 27 announcement that Bill Conour has been charged in a federal criminal complaint with misappropriating more than $2.5 million in client funds from December 2000 to March 2012. If the 64-year-old is indeed guilty of the wire-fraud charge he faces, where did all the money go?

Judge rejects Durham motion to throw out indictment

April 20, 2012
A federal judge on Thursday rejected Indianapolis financier Tim Durham’s months-long quest to have his indictment dismissed on the grounds that the government used wiretaps before it had court authorization to do so.
View All Articles
Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Lori, you must really love wedding cake stories like this one ... happy enuf ending for you?

  2. This new language about a warning has not been discussed at previous meetings. It's not available online. Since it must be made public knowledge before the vote, does anyone know exactly what it says? Further, this proposal was held up for 5 weeks because members Carol and Lucy insisted that all terms used be defined. So now, definitions are unnecessary and have not been inserted? Beyond these requirements, what is the logic behind giving one free pass to discriminators? Is that how laws work - break it once and that's ok? Just don't do it again? Three members of Carmel's council have done just about everything they can think of to prohibit an anti-discrimination ordinance in Carmel, much to Brainard's consternation, I'm told. These three 'want to be so careful' that they have failed to do what at least 13 other communities, including Martinsville, have already done. It's not being careful. It's standing in the way of what 60% of Carmel residents want. It's hurting CArmel in thT businesses have refused to locate because the council has not gotten with the program. And now they want to give discriminatory one free shot to do so. Unacceptable. Once three members leave the council because they lost their races, the Carmel council will have unanimous approval of the ordinance as originally drafted, not with a one free shot to discriminate freebie. That happens in January 2016. Why give a freebie when all we have to do is wait 3 months and get an ordinance with teeth from Day 1? If nothing else, can you please get s copy from Carmel and post it so we can see what else has changed in the proposal?

  3. Here is an interesting 2012 law review article for any who wish to dive deeper into this subject matter: Excerpt: "Judicial interpretation of the ADA has extended public entity liability to licensing agencies in the licensure and certification of attorneys.49 State bar examiners have the authority to conduct fitness investigations for the purpose of determining whether an applicant is a direct threat to the public.50 A “direct threat” is defined as “a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services as provided by § 35.139.”51 However, bar examiners may not utilize generalizations or stereotypes about the applicant’s disability in concluding that an applicant is a direct threat.52"

  4. We have been on the waiting list since 2009, i was notified almost 4 months ago that we were going to start receiving payments and we still have received nothing. Every time I call I'm told I just have to wait it's in the lawyers hands. Is everyone else still waiting?

  5. I hope you dont mind but to answer my question. What amendment does this case pretain to?