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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  2. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  3. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT