ILNews

Bar marks milestones; celebration set

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Bar Crawl

Bar Crawl is Indiana Lawyer’s new section that will highlight 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.

Evansville bar marks milestones

Earlier this month, 12 Evansville attorneys were sworn into practice before the Supreme Court of the United States, while later this month, a historic courthouse project will be celebrated.

Vanderburgh Circuit Judge Carl A. Heldt made an oral motion to admit the attorneys to the SCOTUS in open court Oct. 5. The motion was approved by the justices, thereby admitting Todd Clarke Barsumian, Erin L. Berger, Julianne Lutz Fox, John Jewell, Matthew William Lutz, Kathryn L. Kornblum-Zelle, Christopher Lee, Krista Bonewitz Lockyear, Andrew J. Manion, Catherine Anne Nestrick, Kathryn A. Sullivan, and Andrew Scott Ward to practice before the nation’s highest court, according to a release from the Evansville Bar Association.

To be considered for admittance, the attorneys had to submit a personal application statement, obtain a certificate of good standing from the Indiana Supreme Court, and be endorsed by two sponsors who were already members of the Supreme Court of the United States.

The EBA will also celebrate the restoration of the Vanderburgh Superior Courtroom in that county’s historic courthouse at a reception from 5 to 7 p.m. Oct. 21 to honor the donors for the restoration and to give them a chance to see firsthand the construction project, according to the EBA.

While the event is not open to the public, all donors and supporters of the project, including many EBA members, will receive an invitation.

The Randall T. Shepard Courtroom is named the chief justice of the Indiana Supreme Court, who also is an Evansville native. The courtroom will officially be renovated in time for the EBA’s 100th anniversary to be celebrated at the EBA’s Law Day event in April 2011.

Chief Justice Shepard, who will speak at the reception, was also instrumental in encouraging EBA members to support the renovations during the past few years. All of the renovation costs have been covered by the EBA’s fundraising campaign.

The chief architect will also be on hand for tours.

The courtroom, which originally housed the Vanderburgh Superior Court, will likely be used for some court hearings, as well as teen court, memorial events, and other special events for the Evansville legal community.

During the restoration process, painstaking efforts were taken to find original furniture pieces from the courtroom, and all the woodwork and gallery benches have been restored. If original pieces could not be found based on historical documents for the courthouse, similar pieces were used, said Susan Vollmer, EBA executive director. Vollmer added that even the paint was scraped to find the original color so that paint could be found to match it.

Kuykendall-Conn celebration set

The theme of the Marion County Bar Association’s 2010 Kuykendall-Conn Celebration is “Resurrecting the Call of Justice for All.”

The silent auction, cocktail hour and dinner will be at The Westin Hotel, 50 S. Capitol Ave., Indianapolis at 6 p.m. Nov. 5. Tickets are $50 per person and tables are available for $500.

The Kuykendall-Conn Celebration, which takes place every other year, started in 1992 and is the signature event of the MCBA. It is named for Marion Superior Judge Rufus C. Kuykendall, one of the first African-Americans to be elected judge in Marion County and who served from 1966 to 1974. Harriette V. Bailey-Conn was the first woman and the first African-American to be appointed public defender of Indiana May 1, 1970, a position she held until she died in 1981.

The original award dinner was intended to highlight African-American judicial talent and to encourage the election and appointment of African-American judges. While the organization still recognizes this issue, the event has evolved to also give members and supporters of the MCBA the opportunity to partner with the community in an effort to raise donations for scholarships and financial support for pro bono programs, Talk to a Lawyer Today programs, and community awareness projects and educational opportunities for local youth such as the MCBA’s college application drives and mentoring programs, according to Dana Phillips, MCBA president.

The MCBA is also involved with Shortridge Magnet High School for Law and Public Policy, which became a magnet school at the beginning of the 2009-10 school year.

For more information and to order tickets, contact MCBA president Dana Phillips at (317) 234-5788.•
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The appellate court just said doctors can be sued for reporting child abuse. The most dangerous form of child abuse with the highest mortality rate of any form of child abuse (between 6% and 9% according to the below listed studies). Now doctors will be far less likely to report this form of dangerous child abuse in Indiana. If you want to know what this is, google the names Lacey Spears, Julie Conley (and look at what happened when uninformed judges returned that child against medical advice), Hope Ybarra, and Dixie Blanchard. Here is some really good reporting on what this allegation was: http://media.star-telegram.com/Munchausenmoms/ Here are the two research papers: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213487900810 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213403000309 25% of sibling are dead in that second study. 25%!!! Unbelievable ruling. Chilling. Wrong.

  2. MELISA EVA VALUE INVESTMENT Greetings to you from Melisa Eva Value Investment. We offer Business and Personal loans, it is quick and easy and hence can be availed without any hassle. We do not ask for any collateral or guarantors while approving these loans and hence these loans require minimum documentation. We offer great and competitive interest rates of 2% which do not weigh you down too much. These loans have a comfortable pay-back period. Apply today by contacting us on E-mail: melisaeva9@gmail.com WE DO NOT ASK FOR AN UPFRONT FEE. BEWARE OF SCAMMERS AND ONLINE FRAUD.

  3. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  4. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

  5. From the article's fourth paragraph: "Her work underscores the blurry lines in Russia between the government and businesses . . ." Obviously, the author of this piece doesn't pay much attention to the "blurry lines" between government and businesses that exist in the United States. And I'm not talking only about Trump's alleged conflicts of interest. When lobbyists for major industries (pharmaceutical, petroleum, insurance, etc) have greater access to this country's elected representatives than do everyday individuals (i.e., voters), then I would say that the lines between government and business in the United States are just as blurry, if not more so, than in Russia.

ADVERTISEMENT