ILNews

Downtown Indianapolis fire affects law firms

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

An early morning fire in downtown Indianapolis gave two nearby law firms a scare as flames poured out of the building.

A fire broke out around 3 a.m. at an apartment building under construction just off the canal and bordered by Senate Avenue and Michigan and North Streets. The fire continued to burn into the early afternoon. The blaze sent ash, smoke, and embers into the air, concerning nearby building owners and occupants.

LewisWagner's windows along the side of the building facing the canal broke as a result of the heat from the fire. Partner John Trimble said none of the windows broke inward and there are spider-web-sized cracks in all of those windows. No smoke entered the building through the broken windows. A contractor will board the windows until they can be replaced, he said. LewisWagner is about 150 feet away from the apartment building, which was across the canal, and firefighters used the firm's lot to spray water on the fire.

Schultz and Pogue, which is about 300 feet and across a parking lot from the building, reported no damage to the firm, although the firm has called a fire safety engineer to inspect the building's roof to make sure it doesn't have any damage, said partner Peter Pogue.

When Pogue arrived at the building around 6:30 a.m., the police and fire departments wouldn't let staff in because of safety concerns of the building catching fire from the blowing embers. By 8 a.m., the staff was allowed in, although Pogue said they were told not to come in until noon. Access to the firm is limited because several surrounding streets were closed because of the fire.

Katz & Korin, which is about a block south of the fire, reported no damage but could smell the smoke when the firm's front door would open.

Officials at the Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis, a few blocks from the site, reported that other than traffic problems because of blocked streets, nothing was impacted by the fire.

Trimble learned of the fire after he turned on the news this morning and said he rushed to the firm as quickly as he could and sent e-mails to the firm's attorneys telling them not to come in until later in the morning.

Pogue was notified by a co-owner of his firm's building.

"This is very disappointing," Trimble said, noting the firm feels for the owners who lost their building. "It was a very attractive structure, and we were looking forward to it being completed."

The building, Cosmopolitan on the Canal, was a $33 million apartment project scheduled to begin leasing units in May. Retail space was also part of the project.

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. I work with some older lawyers in the 70s, 80s, and they are sharp as tacks compared to the foggy minded, undisciplined, inexperienced, listless & aimless "youths" being churned out by the diploma mill law schools by the tens of thousands. A client is generally lucky to land a lawyer who has decided to stay in practice a long time. Young people shouldn't kid themselves. Experience is golden especially in something like law. When you start out as a new lawyer you are about as powerful as a babe in the cradle. Whereas the silver halo of age usually crowns someone who can strike like thunder.

  2. YES I WENT THROUGH THIS BEFORE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION WITH MY YOUNGEST SON PEOPLE NEED TO LEAVE US ALONE WITH DCS IF WE ARE NOT HURTING OR NEGLECT OUR CHILDREN WHY ARE THEY EVEN CALLED OUT AND THE PEOPLE MAKING FALSE REPORTS NEED TO GO TO JAIL AND HAVE A CLASS D FELONY ON THERE RECORD TO SEE HOW IT FEELS. I WENT THREW ALOT WHEN HE WAS TAKEN WHAT ELSE DOES THESE SCHOOL WANT ME TO SERVE 25 YEARS TO LIFE ON LIES THERE TELLING OR EVEN LE SAME THING LIED TO THE COUNTY PROSECUTOR JUST SO I WOULD GET ARRESTED AND GET TIME HE THOUGHT AND IT TURNED OUT I DID WHAT I HAD TO DO NOT PROUD OF WHAT HAPPEN AND SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SEEKING MEDICAL ATTENTION FOR MY CHILD I AM DISABLED AND SICK OF GETTING TREATED BADLY HOW WOULD THEY LIKE IT IF I CALLED APS ON THEM FOR A CHANGE THEN THEY CAN COME AND ARREST THEM RIGHT OUT OF THE SCHOOL. NOW WE ARE HOMELESS AND THE CHILDREN ARE STAYING WITH A RELATIVE AND GUARDIAN AND THE SCHOOL WON'T LET THEM GO TO SCHOOL THERE BUT WANT THEM TO GO TO SCHOOL WHERE BULLYING IS ALLOWED REAL SMART THINKING ON A SCHOOL STAFF.

  3. Family court judges never fail to surprise me with their irrational thinking. First of all any man who abuses his wife is not fit to be a parent. A man who can't control his anger should not be allowed around his child unsupervised period. Just because he's never been convicted of abusing his child doesn't mean he won't and maybe he hasn't but a man that has such poor judgement and control is not fit to parent without oversight - only a moron would think otherwise. Secondly, why should the mother have to pay? He's the one who made the poor decisions to abuse and he should be the one to pay the price - monetarily and otherwise. Yes it's sad that the little girl may be deprived of her father, but really what kind of father is he - the one that abuses her mother the one that can't even step up and do what's necessary on his own instead the abused mother is to pay for him???? What is this Judge thinking? Another example of how this world rewards bad behavior and punishes those who do right. Way to go Judge - NOT.

  4. Right on. Legalize it. We can take billions away from the drug cartels and help reduce violence in central America and more unwanted illegal immigration all in one fell swoop. cut taxes on the savings from needless incarcerations. On and stop eroding our fourth amendment freedom or whatever's left of it.

  5. "...a switch from crop production to hog production "does not constitute a significant change."??? REALLY?!?! Any judge that cannot see a significant difference between a plant and an animal needs to find another line of work.

ADVERTISEMENT