Recent Blog Posts

Scouring the Web for evidence

June 6, 2008
Comment(1)
It’s no secret that what you post online can be viewed by anyone – including a judge. A not-for-publication case handed down by the Court of Appeals Thursday involves a custody dispute, with the father offering evidence he found on...
More

More attorneys fail to pay, get CLE credit

June 5, 2008
Comment(1)
Is there something in the water that’s causing attorneys to disregard some of the most basic requirements of being a lawyer in Indiana ? It seems more and more attorneys who practice in Indiana are having trouble meeting continuing legal...
More

CA court upholds gay marriage ruling

June 4, 2008
Comments(0)
Gay marriage will be allowed in California – for now. The California Supreme Court released an order today denying requests to stay its decision to legalize gay marriages until after the November 2008 election. The split court voted 4-3 to...
More

Dishing out the discipline

June 4, 2008
Comments(0)
Written by guest blogger Michael Hoskins, Indiana Lawyer reporter: Disciplinary actions can be like a legal newspaper's police crime blotter – attorneys say that's what the legal community flips to first to see if anyone they know is in the news....
More

A sign of the economic times?

June 3, 2008
Comments(0)
Baker & Daniels announced Monday the firm has opened an office in downtown Chicago , citing the expansion as way to meet the growing needs of its Midwest clients. The seven attorneys who make up the new branch in the...
More

Creative moments in law

June 2, 2008
Comment(1)
Valparaiso University School of Law professor Robert Blomquist has written a paper, “Thinking about Law and Creativity: On the 100 Most Creative Moments in American Law.” Blomquist sent a survey to a bunch of legal historians to find out what...
More

This blog is in session

June 2, 2008
Comments(0)
Welcome to First Impressions, Indiana Lawyer ’s foray into the world of blogging. There’s a lot of legal news happening in Indiana and elsewhere, and we want to give our readers a forum to discuss the latest court rulings, trends...
More

About

December 3, 2007
Comment(1)
Welcome to First Impressions, Indiana Lawyer’s legal blog. Your host is Jennifer Mehalik, Indiana Lawyer’s Web editor. Mehalik grew up in Indianapolis and attended Indiana University in Bloomington. After writing for other IBJ Media publications, Mehalik joined Indiana Lawyer as a...
More

Page  << 21 22 23 pager
ADVERTISEMENT
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. The $320,000 is the amount the school spent in litigating two lawsuits: One to release the report involving John Trimble (as noted in the story above) and one defending the discrimination lawsuit. The story above does not mention the amount spent to defend the discrimination suit, that's why the numbers don't match. Thanks for reading.

  2. $160k? Yesterday the figure was $320k. Which is it Indiana Lawyer. And even more interesting, which well connected law firm got the (I am guessing) $320k, six time was the fired chancellor received. LOL. (From yesterday's story, which I guess we were expected to forget overnight ... "According to records obtained by the Journal & Courier, Purdue spent $161,812, beginning in July 2012, in a state open records lawsuit and $168,312, beginning in April 2013, for defense in a federal lawsuit. Much of those fees were spent battling court orders to release an independent investigation by attorney John Trimble that found Purdue could have handled the forced retirement better")

  3. The numbers are harsh; 66 - 24 in the House, 40 - 10 in the Senate. And it is an idea pushed by the Democrats. Dead end? Ummm not necessarily. Just need to go big rather than go home. Nuclear option. Give it to the federal courts, the federal courts will ram this down our throats. Like that other invented right of the modern age, feticide. Rights too precious to be held up by 2000 years of civilization hang in the balance. Onward!

  4. I'm currently seeing someone who has a charge of child pornography possession, he didn't know he had it because it was attached to a music video file he downloaded when he was 19/20 yrs old and fought it for years until he couldn't handle it and plead guilty of possession. He's been convicted in Illinois and now lives in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better to give them a chance to prove to the community and their families that they pose no threat? He's so young and now because he was being a kid and downloaded music at a younger age, he has to pay for it the rest of his life? It's unfair, he can't live a normal life, and has to live in fear of what people can say and do to him because of something that happened 10 years ago? No one deserves that, and no one deserves to be labeled for one mistake, he got labeled even though there was no intent to obtain and use the said content. It makes me so sad to see someone I love go through this and it makes me holds me back a lot because I don't know how people around me will accept him...second chances should be given to those under the age of 21 at least so they can be given a chance to live a normal life as a productive member of society.

  5. It's just an ill considered remark. The Sup Ct is inherently political, as it is a core part of government, and Marbury V Madison guaranteed that it would become ever more so Supremely thus. So her remark is meaningless and she just should have not made it.... what she could have said is that Congress is a bunch of lazys and cowards who wont do their jobs so the hard work of making laws clear, oftentimes stops with the Sups sorting things out that could have been resolved by more competent legislation. That would have been a more worthwhile remark and maybe would have had some relevance to what voters do, since voters cant affect who gets appointed to the supremely un-democratic art III courts.

ADVERTISEMENT