ILBlogs

First Impressions
Jennifer Mehalik
More First Impressions

Recent Blog Posts

Put the camera away in hospitals

Jennifer Nelson
August 5, 2011
Comments(2)
Some hospitals are keeping the camcorders out the delivery room. Is it for patient safety or hopes of avoiding lawsuits?
More

Services go online

Jennifer Nelson
August 4, 2011
Comments(3)
The new Clerk of the Courts portal is up and running and registration has gone 21st century. What are your thoughts about paying fees and managing trust accounts online?
More

Illinois attorney to visit Indiana prison for 16 months

Jennifer Nelson
August 3, 2011
Comments(0)
The attorney from Illinois that tried to sneak drugs into the federal prison in Terre Haute now gets to spend some time in prison thanks to his lapse in judgment.
More

ABA asking for more employment info from law schools

Jennifer Nelson
July 28, 2011
Comments(0)
The American Bar Association’s 2011 annual questionnaire to ABA-approved law schools will require more information from the schools on employment and placement of graduates.
More

Iowa considers less transparency in discipline process

Jennifer Nelson
July 26, 2011
Comments(3)
Iowa’s Supreme Court will consider a proposal that would allow confidentiality in disciplinary proceedings in exchange for lawyers agreeing to have their licenses suspended.
More

ABA urges firms to form disaster plans

Jennifer Nelson
July 21, 2011
Comments(0)
At its annual meeting in August, the American Bar Association will emphasize the importance of law firm disaster plans.
More

Top-paid general counsel

Jennifer Nelson
July 20, 2011
Comments(0)
Two corporate counsel with Indiana-based companies are among the best-paid general counsel in the country.
More

Legal writing pet peeves

Jennifer Nelson
July 15, 2011
Comments(3)
What phrase or aspect of legal writing do you cringe at when you read? Do you wish you could eradicate a certain saying from legal briefs?
More
Page  << 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 >> pager
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