ILNews

Bar associations host free CLE

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Bar Crawl

Bar Crawl is Indiana Lawyer’s section highlighting bar association news around the state. We try to include bar association news and trends in our regular stories, but we want to include more news from specialty and county bars. If you’d like to submit an update about your bar association or a photo from an event your bar association has hosted to Indiana Lawyer, or if you have questions about having your bar association news included in the newspaper, please send it to Rebecca Berfanger, rberfanger@ibj.com, along with contact information for any follow up questions at least two weeks in advance of the issue date.

Bar associations and pro bono districts are working together in December and January to promote replays of a CLE for attorneys who want to participate in the annual statewide Talk to a Lawyer Today event taking place Jan. 17, 2011. The CLE, which lawyers are not required to take to participate in the event, originally took place in Indianapolis in October.

This year’s 6-hour CLE, including one hour of ethics, focuses on mental-health law, child support, Social Security disability law, and adoption law.

The CLE is available free of charge or at a reduced cost to participants who sign up for at least one two-hour shift during the Jan. 17 event.

To receive free CLE, districts will also encourage attorneys to agree to take on a pro bono case in addition to participating in TTALT. Attorneys who are not able to take on pro bono work because they are restricted by their jobs, such as city or state attorneys, or those who prefer not to take a pro bono case may be asked to pay a nominal fee to attend the CLE.

Participants in all CLE replays will also receive the book “Commonly Asked Questions about Indiana Law,” which they will be able to reference during their TTALT volunteer experience, and it will be theirs to keep after the Jan. 17 event. The Indianapolis Bar Association has partnered with event organizers for many years to provide this book at no cost to volunteers.

The St. Joseph County Bar Association, which partnered with its pro bono district last year for the January 2010 TTALT event, has continued its Ask a Lawyer series at the St. Joseph County Public Library in downtown South Bend. The latest Ask a Lawyer took place Oct. 28. Volunteers helped more than 60 people, according to the bar association’s November 2010 newsletter.

The CLE replay in South Bend for Pro Bono District 2, which is comprised of Elkhart, Kosciusko, Marshall and St. Joseph counties, took place Dec. 3.

Interested attorneys can still call their local pro bono district plan administrators for more information or to sign up for upcoming CLEs. Contact information is available at http://www.in.gov/judiciary/probono under “Information for attorneys.”

For instance, the Allen County Bar Association will host the CLE replay for Pro Bono District 3, which is comprised of Adams, Allen, DeKalb, Huntington, LaGrange, Noble, Steuben, Whitley, and Wells counties, at their offices in Fort Wayne on Dec. 10 and Jan. 10.

The CLE for District 1, which is comprised of Jasper, Lake, LaPorte, Newton, Porter, Pulaski, and Starke counties, will take place Jan. 14 at Valparaiso University.

District 4, which is comprised of Benton, Carroll, Clinton, Fountain, Montgomery, Tippecanoe, Warren, and White counties, hosted a CLE Dec. 3, and plans to host a second program Dec. 10 at the offices of Indiana Legal Services in Lafayette.

District 10, which is comprised of Greene, Lawrence, Monroe, and Owen counties, will host a CLE Dec. 10 at the Monroe County Public Library in Bloomington.

More information is also available on the state bar’s website, www.inbar.org, under Legal News.•

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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  4. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  5. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

ADVERTISEMENT