ILNews

DTCI: Pennell receives ADTA President's Award

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Stephen R. Pennell, former president of DTCI and partner in the Lafayette firm of Stuart & Branigin, received the President’s Award for Outstanding Service to the ADTA at the Association of Defense Trial Attorneys’ annual meeting in Hawaii.
 

pennell-15col Stephen R. Pennell, former president of DTCI (IL Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)

ADTA President Frankie Colon Pagan presented the award in recognition of Steve’s efforts during his year as president. As chair of the long-range planning committee, Steve helped to develop and to begin implementation of the first long-range plan in the history of the ADTA. Among the achievements of Steve and the committee were the approvals of the ADTA mission statement, the scheduling of a series of webinars covering deposition practice, and the enhancement of the mentoring program.

Association of Defense Trial Attorneys invites only one attorney per million population in each community to become members. The mission of the ADTA is to select as members the best defense trial attorney in each community, to promote quality networking and referral opportunities, and to provide outstanding educational programs which improve the trial skills of its members while maintaining a balance of activities for family participation.•

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. As one of the many consumers affected by this breach, I found my bank data had been lifted and used to buy over $200 of various merchandise in New York. I did a pretty good job of tracing the purchases to stores around a college campus just from the info on my bank statement. Hm. Mr. Hill, I would like my $200 back! It doesn't belong to the state, in my opinion. Give it back to the consumers affected. I had to freeze my credit and take out data protection, order a new debit card and wait until it arrived. I deserve something for my trouble!

  2. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  3. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  4. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  5. Different rules for different folks....

ADVERTISEMENT