Bar Crawl - 3/2/11

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Bar Crawl

ISBA, AG team up for 3rd food drive

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller and the Indiana State Bar Association have teamed up with Feeding Indiana’s Hungry for the third annual March Against Hunger food drive, which is scheduled for March 14 to 31.

The competition between law firms is to raise donations of money and nonperishable foods for Indiana’s 11 regional food banks.

“While there are some hopeful signs of an economic recovery on the horizon, for many in our state the harsh realities of unemployment and financial difficulties leave them desperate to buy the basic food essentials to feed their families. For the third year I am calling upon the members of my profession to step up and do what attorneys do best – serve the interests of others,” Zoeller said in a statement. “The food banks in Indiana are facing a critical shortage of supplies due to the increase in the need to help put food on the table of our fellow Hoosiers. I’ve been very proud of the past support by the many members of the ISBA, and I hope for greater support this year to meet the greater need.”

In 2010, Zoeller presented the Attorney General’s Cup to the highest donating firms in three categories. Barnes & Thornburg was the winner of the large firm division; Rubin & Levin placed first in the small firm and solo practitioner division; and the Office of the U.S. Trustee Indianapolis/Region 10 won the public/nonprofit division. This year’s categories will be the same, recognizing a winner in each category who collects the most donations.

Visit to sign up to participate in the 2011 statewide competition. Firms may sign up before the competition begins or anytime during the collection period. For more information, contact Michelle Mayer at the attorney general’s office at or 317-234-6668.

CLE focus on stress and social media

“The Attorney and Social Media & Stress Management for Attorneys,” which counts as three credits of CLE and one credit of ethics, will take place at 1 p.m. March 29 at The Summit Club, 211 W. Washington St., South Bend. The CLE will be followed by a reception.

Scheduled presenters are John Conway and Erin Linder of LaDue Curran Kuehn, and Genelle King of King Communication Resources.

The CLE will address how Indiana’s ethics rules apply to using social media such as LinkedIn, blogs, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and MySpace. These issues include: advertising and solicitation, investigation, and confidentiality.

Among these issues are: What constitutes advertising on social media sites and what is impermissible puffing? Are attorney profiles subject to the advertising rules? Can attorneys use social media as a discovery tool for information regarding parties, witnesses, and jurors? When is an attorney-client relationship created? How can an attorney protect his client from waiving the privilege?

The stress management portion of the CLE will focus on myths and facts about stress, what does it mean to be “stress hardy,” and effective ways to break negative stress cycles and enhance the quality of everyday experiences.

The fee includes the reception and refreshments. Cost is $75 for SJCBA members who are new attorney members, non-profit attorneys, and full-time government employees; $115 for all other SJCBA members; and $230 for non-members.•


Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.