ILNews

DTCI: Indiana Civil Litigation Review

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The DTCI’s flagship publication, the Indiana Civil Litigation Review, will be distributed soon. Members and subscribers can anticipate another issue full of valuable information and analyses by leaders of Indiana’s defense bar. The articles that will appear in this issue include:

• Litigation Issues: Disclosure, Objections, Nonparties, Jerry E. Huelat & Robert J. Penney

• The Use of Social Media in Litigation: Helping Your Case with Effective Monitoring and Capturing Techniques, Lyn Mettler

• By Word or by Deed: An Analysis of a Construction Manager’s Contractual and Assumed Duties to Workers following Hunt Construction Group, Inc. v. Garrett, Michael L. Meyer

• Does It Compute? The Impact of Predictive Coding on Product Liability Litigation, Jeffrey J. Mortier

• Can a Healthcare Provider Defendant in a Medical Malpractice Action Plead a Nonparty Defense as Purportedly Required by Section 17 of the Comparative Fault Act?, Andrew J. Palmison

• Worker’s Compensation Year in Review, Ann H. Stewart

• The Virtual Filing Cabinet: Discovery of Electronic Data in the Modern Era, Meredith T. White, Patrick W. Price & J. Curtis Greene

• Cyber-Risk: Is Your Client’s Business Protected under its Current Policy?, Mark M. Holdridge and Seth R. Wilson

The Indiana Civil Litigation Review welcomes submissions from DTCI members and others on topics of interest to the Indiana defense bar. Please write Molly Terry, managing editor, at MTerry@dtci.org, if you have a topic you would like the board of editors to consider.•

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. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  2. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  3. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

  4. The fee increase would be livable except for the 11% increase in spending at the Disciplinary Commission. The Commission should be focused on true public harm rather than going on witch hunts against lawyers who dare to criticize judges.

  5. Marijuana is safer than alcohol. AT the time the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was enacted all major pharmaceutical companies in the US sold marijuana products. 11 Presidents of the US have smoked marijuana. Smoking it does not increase the likelihood that you will get lung cancer. There are numerous reports of canabis oil killing many kinds of incurable cancer. (See Rick Simpson's Oil on the internet or facebook).

ADVERTISEMENT