ILNews

Bar crawl - 5/11/11

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Bar Crawl

Bar Crawl is Indiana Lawyer’s section highlighting bar association news around the state. The IL strives to include bar association news and trends in its regular stories, and we would like 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, or if you have questions about having your bar association news included in the newspaper, please send it to Jenny Montgomery at jmontgomery@ibj.com, along with contact information for any follow-up questions at least two weeks in advance of the issue date.

ISBA solo and small firm event

The Indiana State Bar Association’s Solo & Small Firm Conference will be June 2 through 4 at the French Lick Springs Hotel. Early registration deadline is May 18, and registration may be made via the bar’s website: www.inbar.org. Rooms may be reserved online at www.frenchlick.com or by phone at 888-936-9360 (the group code for this event is 0611ISB). For more information, contact Maryann Williams at 800-266-2581 or mwilliams@inbar.org.

IBA bench bar conference

The Indianapolis Bar Association will host the 2011 Bench Bar Conference June 16 through 18 at French Lick Springs Resort & Casino. The deadline for discount room rates is May 16. Rooms may be reserved online at www.frenchlick.com (the group code for the event is 0611IBA) or by calling 888-936-9360 and asking for the IBA rate. Registration is open to members of the IBA, all attorneys licensed in Indiana, conference sponsors, and their personal guests. For more information, contact Julie Armstrong at jarmstrong@indybar.org.

Violence response conference

The St. Joseph County Bar Association will host a Community Coordinated Response Conference from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. May 19 and 20 at Morris Park Country Club, 2200 McKinley Ave., South Bend. The cost to attend each day is $49 and includes continental breakfast and lunch.

Presented by Family & Children’s Center, YWCA North Central Indiana, and the Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence, the conference will be led by trainers who specialize in the Duluth Model. This model provides a method for communities to coordinate their responses to domestic violence through an inter-agency approach that brings together justice and human service interventions with the primary goal of protecting victims from ongoing abuse. Registration deadline is May 13. For more information, contact Mary Burzynski at 574-259-5666 or marketing@fccin.org.

IBF Impact Fund grant project

The Indianapolis Bar Foundation has reorganized its grant-making activity with the intent to provide greater impact with its dollars. Its Impact Fund is now organized to provide a single high-dollar grant to an Indianapolis area project meeting the purpose of the IBF. The 2011 grant amount is $35,000.

To be considered, a project must advance the administration of justice and an understanding of the law through philanthropy, education, and service. The IBF wishes to support a project presented by an organization or collaborating organizations that creates a substantial positive impact in central Indiana.

Criteria for the grant specify that: project funding may be awarded only to non-profit organizations; the project benefits the central Indiana community, as a whole, including its impact on the image of the legal profession; the project presents opportunities for members of the central Indiana legal community to participate on a pro bono or modest means basis; the project articulates a plan to be sustained by other funding beyond the potential financial award from the IBF; the project represents either a new venture for the applicant organization(s) or a plan for significant supplementation to an existing service.

Applications are due by June 15, 2011, and are available at www.indybar.org.

Funds will be awarded by August.•

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT