ILBlogs

First Impressions
Jennifer Mehalik
More First Impressions

Recent Blog Posts

Look it up, lawmakers

Jennifer Mehalik
September 22, 2008
Comments(0)
From Indiana Lawyer reporter Michael Hoskins: We look at Indiana’s appellate decisions every day. Frequently, a legal issue is raised about an ambiguous federal or state statute where words aren’t defined and the courts must address what the legislative intent could...
More

What happened to civility?

Jennifer Mehalik
September 18, 2008
Comments(0)
We’ve got another sitting judge in trouble for his actions. Howard Superior Judge Stephen Jessup received a public admonition after storming over to the prosecuting attorney’s office trying to find out where the deputy prosecutor was who was supposed to be...
More

Happy Constitution Day!

Jennifer Mehalik
September 17, 2008
Comments(0)
Today is Constitution Day in the U.S. Don’t feel bad if you didn’t know that because it’s a fairly new “holiday.” Congress passed an act in 2004 – the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005 – that included requiring schools receiving federal funds...
More

Lawyers love to donate

Jennifer Mehalik
September 15, 2008
Comments(0)
Lawyers like to give money to campaigns. According to the Center for Responsive Politics , lawyers and the legal industry in Indiana are the second-leading industry in donations to political campaigns. In 2008, the legal community has donated nearly $1 million. Retirees...
More

Legal changes post-Sept. 11

Jennifer Mehalik
September 11, 2008
Comments(0)
With today being the anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, I couldn’t help but think about how our country has changed in seven years. I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but I realize now that we aren’t as isolated from the...
More

Interim meetings antiquated

Jennifer Mehalik
September 10, 2008
Comments(0)
Now is the time of the year when the General Assembly’s interim study committees meet to discuss various issues that could become bills in the 2009 session. What strikes me about these meetings is how old-fashioned and time-consuming they are. If...
More

Judicial Conference this week

Jennifer Mehalik
September 8, 2008
Comments(0)
From IL reporter Michael Hoskins:  It’s that time of year. The Judicial Conference of Indiana is holding its annual meeting this week in downtown Indianapolis, and the agenda  shows some interesting tidbits that will be covered at the three-day CLE-eligible conference....
More

Attorneys in trouble for ads

Jennifer Mehalik
September 5, 2008
Comments(2)
Two Indianapolis attorneys received public reprimands for the use of “Legal Advertisement” and other phrases on brochures they give to prospective clients. After reading the opinion handed down by the Indiana Supreme Court yesterday, I’m confused about how the process of...
More
Page  << 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 >> pager
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  2. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  3. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  4. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  5. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

ADVERTISEMENT