ILNews

Counsel reenergizes section

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
In-House Counsel

Even though the Corporate Counsel Section of the Indiana State Bar Association can boast a membership of 431 statewide, it was a relatively inactive group until the immediate past chair took over in 2009.

Prior to that, there had been some activity on a members-only listserv, including information about relevant continuing legal education opportunities from ISBA staff liaison Maryann Williams, and conversations about issues specific to general counsels. However, Williams credited the section’s leadership in recent years with working hard to get more recognition and to offer more opportunities for its membership to become engaged in ISBA efforts.

The immediate past chair of the section, Stephen Landrum Due, is one member of the leadership team who made a push to make the section more active.
 

due-stephen Stephen Due, assistant general counsel at American United Life Insurance, helped reenergize the ISBA Corporate Counsel Section. (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

Due is an assistant general counsel in the nine-member legal department of American United Life Insurance Company, a OneAmerica company in Indianapolis. He joined the ISBA Corporate Counsel Section when he joined AUL in 2007. Due began his legal career as a member of Bingham McHale’s labor and employment practice group after passing the bar in 2002.

He became chair of the Corporate Counsel Section in 2009. He served until the ISBA 2010 Annual Meeting in mid-October, when he was succeeded by Deborah Edwards of Heritage Environmental Services in Indianapolis.

Due didn’t blame past leadership – or anyone for that matter – for the section’s previous inactivity. Instead, he said it was likely due to the nature of an in-house counsel’s job and how little time this group of lawyers has for involvement in professional organizations compared to attorneys in private practice.

“When I come into the office, I might have a ‘to do’ list of three things. By 9 a.m., I realize there are other things I need to take care of instead,” he said. “Our days are never our own.”

That is not a negative aspect of the job, Due added. The reality is that an in-house counsel is an integral part of the company, he continued, unlike an attorney at a firm who might have more flexibility and independence when it comes to working directly with clients.

Another reason the membership may have been less active in previous years, he said, could be that corporate counsel attorneys don’t tend to be as concerned as their counterparts at law firms when it comes to networking and business development. Therefore, being active in the ISBA may be less of a priority.

Business development may not be viewed as vital by corporate counsel, the way it often is for private practice lawyers, because each corporate counsel answers only to one client. If in-house lawyers plan to stay with their companies for a long time, which many tend to want to do, the perceived value of networking drops.

However, Due said he hopes in-house lawyers see the bigger picture and understand the benefits of networking with other attorneys – both in-house counsel and private attorneys. For some, it might mean a new relationship that could lead to the identification of new outside counsel for work not handled in house. For others, it may be a peer to talk to who works for a similar type of company and might deal with similar issues.

He added that when an in-house lawyer works in a small legal department or is the only in-house attorney for a company, there might be even more of a need to meet with other general counsel to get their perspective on issues faced.

Personally, Due has been able to make new friends through his involvement in the section. He has met many attorneys he might not otherwise have met.

To encourage more corporate counsel to take advantage of networking opportunities, listserv members were sent survey questions. Due wanted to know if the members wanted CLE opportunities, social events, to receive resources from the section that could help their practices, or if there was something else the section members would want.

He also asked for volunteers to join the organization’s leadership to ensure the group’s sustainability.

Of the fewer than a dozen responses the ISBA received, Due was encouraged that some shared an interest in leadership positions. Several of those responding were named to the section’s council. Due added that in the spirit of ISBA past president Roderick Morgan’s diversity initiative, he sought a diverse group of attorneys for the council.

Due and other council members have since started working on different opportunities. Those included a CLE at the ISBA annual meeting, “Best Practices for Drafting Arbitration Clauses,” which was co-sponsored by the Corporate Counsel, ADR, and Business Law sections.

For now, Due said co-sponsoring CLEs will likely make the most sense for the Corporate Counsel Section because finding a CLE that is helpful to generalists, as many in-house attorneys are, can be difficult. While some in-house attorneys have specialties specific to the type of company they serve, the type of CLE that would benefit them is likely too specific and would not appeal to a broad enough audience.

Due added that for his area of practice, which includes reinsurance and retirement services, he will often travel out of state for CLE.

Section leaders are also working with ISBA staff to look at the group’s budget and where its dues can be most effectively used. As a relatively inactive section with a relatively large membership, the budget was financially sound when he took over, Due said.

The section helped sponsor the We the People program earlier this year as well as a table at an event hosted by the Indiana Fiscal Policy Institute, a non-partisan organization that studies policies on taxes and government spending.

He said the section also helped the Indiana Attorney General’s Office get the word out to members of the section about an unclaimed property amnesty program for companies that had not reported unclaimed pay checks within the specified amount of time.

Going forward, Due said he hopes more members will want to get involved in leadership or other aspects of the section.

Edwards said because she didn’t plan to become chair this year – when she was vice chair, the previous chair elect left a job as corporate counsel to go into private practice – she couldn’t yet discuss specific future events. She planned to meet with Williams in late 2010 to discuss the possibilities.

Edwards said she would like for the section to continue to offer ways for members to be more active, something she said could be especially beneficial for in-house counsel like her.

“I’m not surrounded by lawyers all day long,” she said, describing her situation as a legal department of one. “I think this is a great opportunity to bring together people who are in similar situations. … I want to do something to keep the revitalization going. Maybe we can do CLE or more networking.”

Edwards said interested lawyers could contact her directly at debi.edwards@heritage-enviro.com or (317) 486-2892•

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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The appellate court just said doctors can be sued for reporting child abuse. The most dangerous form of child abuse with the highest mortality rate of any form of child abuse (between 6% and 9% according to the below listed studies). Now doctors will be far less likely to report this form of dangerous child abuse in Indiana. If you want to know what this is, google the names Lacey Spears, Julie Conley (and look at what happened when uninformed judges returned that child against medical advice), Hope Ybarra, and Dixie Blanchard. Here is some really good reporting on what this allegation was: http://media.star-telegram.com/Munchausenmoms/ Here are the two research papers: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213487900810 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213403000309 25% of sibling are dead in that second study. 25%!!! Unbelievable ruling. Chilling. Wrong.

  2. MELISA EVA VALUE INVESTMENT Greetings to you from Melisa Eva Value Investment. We offer Business and Personal loans, it is quick and easy and hence can be availed without any hassle. We do not ask for any collateral or guarantors while approving these loans and hence these loans require minimum documentation. We offer great and competitive interest rates of 2% which do not weigh you down too much. These loans have a comfortable pay-back period. Apply today by contacting us on E-mail: melisaeva9@gmail.com WE DO NOT ASK FOR AN UPFRONT FEE. BEWARE OF SCAMMERS AND ONLINE FRAUD.

  3. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  4. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

  5. From the article's fourth paragraph: "Her work underscores the blurry lines in Russia between the government and businesses . . ." Obviously, the author of this piece doesn't pay much attention to the "blurry lines" between government and businesses that exist in the United States. And I'm not talking only about Trump's alleged conflicts of interest. When lobbyists for major industries (pharmaceutical, petroleum, insurance, etc) have greater access to this country's elected representatives than do everyday individuals (i.e., voters), then I would say that the lines between government and business in the United States are just as blurry, if not more so, than in Russia.

ADVERTISEMENT