ILNews

Blomquist: The IBA Bench Bar Conference, Well Worth the 'Conference Depression' Risk

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

blomquist-kerryHere is a new phrase for me: “Conference Depression.”

According to the Urban Dictionary, the definition of “conference depression” is: “Being extremely depressed after an awesome weekend at a conference.” Withdrawal usually lasts a day or two depending on the conference. Example:

Q: “Dude what’s up with him?”

A: “He just came back from Bench Bar and his ‘conference depression’ is really bad.”

Prediction: On Monday, June 17th, 2013, the moon will be 53 percent visible in the night sky, fathers will be boycotting any and all food after an indulgent Father’s Day, and many Indianapolis lawyers and judges will be suffering from “conference depression” because the IndyBar Bench Bar conference was held just a few days before.

I’m that confident.

Our 2013 IndyBar Bench Bar is June 13th to the 15th in Louisville and it’s gearing up to be the biggest and best one yet. It’s not often lawyers and judges can mix business with pleasure, but over the past 20 years this conference has become known as the premier event to do just that, and in casual attire no less.

Confession of a Bench Bar junkie: I don’t need the CLE and in 20 years I have never been “sent” to this conference. It has always been on my time and on my dime, but it has been one of the best investments I have ever made. It is where I have made great friends that I occasionally get to practice with and to whom I can refer clients (with money). It is where I have met judges from all benches that have become my friends and my colleagues. And it is where I know I will get quality, entertaining CLE because my colleagues are the experts in what they do.

Co-chairs of this year’s 20th Anniversary Bench Bar Conference are Judges Annie Christ-Garcia and Bob Altice who, with their committees, have been working tirelessly to put together a stellar program of events. Highlights are almost too many to mention but include a new in-house counsel track to accompany existing tracks in family, civil and criminal law; golf on Thursday for the brave and the talented (I’m brave); dinner at Quattro, a highly acclaimed chef-owned restaurant in Louisville; and an encore presentation of Trivia Night to benefit the Bar Foundation, which is always a good time.

While this is an unapologetic commercial for Bench Bar, this is also an opportunity for associates to learn and for partners to lead. Any bar leader will tell you that the two questions most frequently asked us by young lawyers are: How can we effectively network and how can we develop a client base? To each of those, the answer is the same. Work your soft skills. Nothing can replace the contacts, the referral sources and the friends you can garner at a conference like this. Especially in this economy, investing in your legal community pays off more than you know. Let’s face it; in this era of voicemail, email, conference calls and webinars, it is the face-to-face natter that falls by the wayside while that is precisely what often determines success. We used to meet people and follow up by email. Now we forge relationships by email and are surprised (positively or negatively) if or when we finally meet them in person.

Confession, lest you doubt I live in a glass house.

I reached out to Frost Brown Todd’s Tom Davis a couple of weeks ago to ask him to reflect on the history of Bench Bar. Twenty years ago, when “T.D” penned this same column, his IndyBar legacy became the Bench Bar Conference. Along with colleagues John Baker, Tony Metz, Jim Babcock and the late great Neil Shook, he choreographed the first of these conferences and IndyBar history was made. By “reaching out,” however, I mean I emailed him some questions. What was shot back was an absolutely appropriate and bracing: “Really? Can’t we just meet in person?”

Ouch. “Snap,” as my teens would say.

The result was the most delightful hour I have spent in a long, long time inadvertently reinforcing the argument that nothing comes close to personal contact. It is what we need to do more of as professionals and as people. Bench Bar is a great place to start. Take a look at the agenda, make your plans now, and prepare to have some fun. Information and registration can be found online at www.indybenchbar.org.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. 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?

  2. 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.

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

ADVERTISEMENT