ILNews

Bar Crawl - 12/4/13

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Bar Crawl

Evansville attorneys donate items and funds to charities

Members of the Evansville Bar Association have been getting into the spirit of giving, according to Executive Director Susan Vollmer.

In October, the association hosted the second annual trivia night, a fundraiser to support the Volunteer Lawyer Program of Southwestern Indiana and the Evansville Legal Aid Society. Twenty teams of eight participated in the three-hour competition, raising more than $5,500. Last year, the event garnered $4,700.

Between rounds of trivia questions, the teams played games like trying to use a spoon to shoot marshmallows into each other’s mouths.

The winners of the 2013 trivia night were a hodgepodge of solo and small practitioners from Evansville. The members of the championship team were: Marcy Groves, Chad Groves, Matt Lutz, Julie Fox, Erin Berger, Lee Veazey, John Brinson and Neil Chapman.

Also, the women’s section of the bar association has been collecting donated items to create kits that will be given to victims of sexual assaults. The bags include a change of clothes and toiletry items such as toothpaste, a toothbrush, lotion and a comb.

The female attorneys assembled 100 kits in early December and then donated them to the local domestic violence shelter, the Albion Fellows Bacon Center. In addition, the lawyers made a monetary contribution to the shelter.•
 

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. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT