ILBlogs

First Impressions
Jennifer Mehalik
More First Impressions

Recent Blog Posts

Survey calls law firm benefit changes ‘stealth cost shifting’

Jennifer Nelson
April 9, 2014
Comments(0)
Large law firm benefit trends paint a somewhat  “conflicted picture” as firms try to manage plan expenses while at the same time lag behind the broader market’s adaptation of consumerism to save costs, based on results of a national survey.
More

Indiana ranks low in part of new access to justice index

Jennifer Nelson
March 14, 2014
Comments(0)
Indiana falls near the middle of the pack when it comes to providing overall access to civil and criminal courts for its most vulnerable populations, according to data from a new project from the National Center for Access to Justice – the Justice Index.
More

Number of female equity partners continues to be low

Jennifer Nelson
February 27, 2014
Comments(8)
The greatest percentage of women occupy the lowest positions in law firms, and the highest positions in firms are occupied by the lowest percentage of women, according to data released by the National Association of Women Lawyers after surveying the top 200 largest law firms in the U.S.
More

Study reveals lawyers leaving the practice of law

Jennifer Nelson
February 18, 2014
Comments(4)
A unique longitudinal study following the career paths of lawyers who passed the bar in 2000 has found that 24 percent – nearly a quarter of them – were no longer practicing law in 2012.
More

I love the law because ...

Jennifer Nelson
February 12, 2014
Comments(6)
Tell us: Why do you love the law?
More

Law firm’s advertising takes to the streets

Jennifer Nelson
February 3, 2014
Comment(1)
We’ve all seen law firms and attorneys advertise on billboards, bus stops and the sides of city buses (I’m looking at you, Ken Nunn.). But Monday morning, an advertisement for a law firm I saw while walking into my office made me take notice.
More

General Assembly’s website looks nice, but is troublesome

Jennifer Nelson
January 6, 2014
Comments(0)
I alluded in my blog Friday to the redesign of the Indiana General Assembly’s website. I have high hopes for the site, as it seems like it will make following the Legislature easier. But right now, it’s got some kinks to work out.
More

District Court website redesign provides easier use

Jennifer Nelson
January 3, 2014
Comments(0)
I spend a lot of time online for my job looking at court and government websites, so I appreciate when those sites are easy to use. The Southern District of Indiana’s website has become one of those sites.
More
Page  << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  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