KimBrand

Recent Articles

Start Page: Voices from the cloud

November 6, 2013
VOIP offers many attractive features. Among them, “cloud based” access to your office phone system. Conferencing, voice mail-to-email, call attendant services, cheap long distance, find me/follow me, etc., are the new normal.
More

Start Page: Not so wonderful wireless comes with hitches

September 11, 2013
The last personal computer you bought probably wasn’t a PC. It was a ‘mobile’ device – a tablet or laptop or smartphone. The common denominator of these devices is their dependence on wireless connectivity to your local area network and/or the Internet. The ‘jack’ is gone.
More

Start Page: Prepare your firm for a disaster before one strikes

June 19, 2013
You don’t need to be a technology expert to understand disaster planning. In fact, it may be an advantage not to be.
More

Start Page: Fighting interruption addiction, continued

May 22, 2013
In my last column, I confessed I was addicted to interruptions: email, voice mail, texts, phone calls, Twitter feeds, etc. Studies have shown multitasking lowers IQ.
More

Start Page: Interruption addiction takes focus to break

March 27, 2013
Time management systems used to be popular. They are irrelevant now because you don’t have any time to manage.
More

Start Page: Master of your domain

February 13, 2013
You may ask: “What is a domain and why would I want one?” Let me assure you that you have one and you want to keep it.
More

Start Page: Top 5 New Year's (IT) resolutions for 2013

December 19, 2012
Make this the year you get out of the poor-productivity ditch.
More

Start Page: why the fax won't die

October 24, 2012
The modern fax machine was introduced in 1964 by Xerox. Fast forward to today. Unless you use a typewriter, there are no other machines in your office that have remained essentially unchanged in form and function for almost 50 years. Fax is ubiquitous, reliable, simple and cheap. Why would you want to mess that up?
More

Start Page: Disaster! It lurks around the corner – protect data now

September 12, 2012
You are hanging by a thread and you don’t even know it. Your Internet connection is delivered by two wires that connect to a box on the outside of your office – and all that separates you from disaster is a cable removed from a jack on the wall.
More

Start Page: Tips to make Google searches more effective

August 15, 2012
G-O-O-G-L-E will replace Q-W-E-R-T-Y on keyboards of the future. It has already replaced S-E-A-R-C-H. Problem is you probably aren’t very good at Google. Like a bad golf swing, without training, you just keep practicing the wrong swing and haven’t taken lessons.
More
View All Articles
Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The $320,000 is the amount the school spent in litigating two lawsuits: One to release the report involving John Trimble (as noted in the story above) and one defending the discrimination lawsuit. The story above does not mention the amount spent to defend the discrimination suit, that's why the numbers don't match. Thanks for reading.

  2. $160k? Yesterday the figure was $320k. Which is it Indiana Lawyer. And even more interesting, which well connected law firm got the (I am guessing) $320k, six time was the fired chancellor received. LOL. (From yesterday's story, which I guess we were expected to forget overnight ... "According to records obtained by the Journal & Courier, Purdue spent $161,812, beginning in July 2012, in a state open records lawsuit and $168,312, beginning in April 2013, for defense in a federal lawsuit. Much of those fees were spent battling court orders to release an independent investigation by attorney John Trimble that found Purdue could have handled the forced retirement better")

  3. The numbers are harsh; 66 - 24 in the House, 40 - 10 in the Senate. And it is an idea pushed by the Democrats. Dead end? Ummm not necessarily. Just need to go big rather than go home. Nuclear option. Give it to the federal courts, the federal courts will ram this down our throats. Like that other invented right of the modern age, feticide. Rights too precious to be held up by 2000 years of civilization hang in the balance. Onward!

  4. I'm currently seeing someone who has a charge of child pornography possession, he didn't know he had it because it was attached to a music video file he downloaded when he was 19/20 yrs old and fought it for years until he couldn't handle it and plead guilty of possession. He's been convicted in Illinois and now lives in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better to give them a chance to prove to the community and their families that they pose no threat? He's so young and now because he was being a kid and downloaded music at a younger age, he has to pay for it the rest of his life? It's unfair, he can't live a normal life, and has to live in fear of what people can say and do to him because of something that happened 10 years ago? No one deserves that, and no one deserves to be labeled for one mistake, he got labeled even though there was no intent to obtain and use the said content. It makes me so sad to see someone I love go through this and it makes me holds me back a lot because I don't know how people around me will accept him...second chances should be given to those under the age of 21 at least so they can be given a chance to live a normal life as a productive member of society.

  5. It's just an ill considered remark. The Sup Ct is inherently political, as it is a core part of government, and Marbury V Madison guaranteed that it would become ever more so Supremely thus. So her remark is meaningless and she just should have not made it.... what she could have said is that Congress is a bunch of lazys and cowards who wont do their jobs so the hard work of making laws clear, oftentimes stops with the Sups sorting things out that could have been resolved by more competent legislation. That would have been a more worthwhile remark and maybe would have had some relevance to what voters do, since voters cant affect who gets appointed to the supremely un-democratic art III courts.

ADVERTISEMENT