ILNews

Editorial: Home is where the heart is for Mr. Copsey

Editorial Indiana Lawyer
February 2, 2011
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Editorial

We often think of law enforcement officers and firefighters as first-responder types who venture into situations where others are reluctant to go.

We’d like to expand the definition of first responder a bit, and bring your attention to an Indianapolis lawyer who after retiring from his day job years ago decided he wasn’t quite done practicing law. He went to work for Indianapolis Legal Aid Society, where he works with elderly residents whose living situations put them at risk of losing their homes. It’s a situation where Orville Copsey Jr. uses his skills as a social worker, which was his first calling, as much as he does his lawyering skills.

At age 79, Mr. Copsey works for ILAS through a grant aimed at keeping elderly residents in their homes. He’s been with ILAS since 1997.
 

Orville Copsey Copsey

Imagine a little bungalow with a fenced-in yard, yet with what looks like the entire contents of the home covering the lawn. The health department has learned that an older person is squatting there – sleeping there at night at least, but it has no running water or electricity, as it was the subject of a tax sale some months back.

It’s not the kind of situation most of us would relish the thought of driving by, never mind stopping in to try and offer assistance.

But this is now Mr. Copsey’s day job, and the world – at least Indianapolis – is a better place because he’s willing to do it.

We surmise he’s so successful at his work because he’s a peer of the people he’s aiming to help. He keeps his car trunk full of cleaning supplies so he can get to work right away, as well as a pet carrier when the homeowner has too many pets to keep safely. He keeps the pet carrier because he can whisk away the animals that are creating a risk for the homeowner more discreetly than can the city’s animal control department.

And instead of showing up at the door dressed as though he were ready to get to work grubbing out the place, he keeps a suit jacket purchased at a second-hand store to wear to initial client meetings. We admire that – he goes into these situations dressed like a lawyer, which has to help the homeowner maintain a sense of dignity.

With his talk of liberating the kitchen and rescuing the sink, it’s easy to tell he enjoys what he does. The “before” photos of one of his cases would tend to point to an unhappy ending, but that turned out to not be the case. This particular homeowner with the liberated kitchen and rescued sink is still at home, nearly four years after becoming one of Mr. Copsey’s clients.

Not all have such good outcomes, but his social work background helps him assess which clients have the physical, mental, and financial ability to keep the home in a state of habitability, and which ones he will need to help find suitable living arrangements.

Mr. Copsey has won the admiration of not only his clients and coworkers at ILAS, but also the people at the Marion County Health Department who assign him cases.

“There are cases where I have no doubt that they could not have been brought to completion but for his involvement,” said MCHD attorney Amy Jones. “It’s who he is, not just where he works. He’s committed to public service and he appreciates and understands the plight of the people he works with.”

And he’s a splendid example of someone with a different definition of the word “retired.” What better way to stay active, engaged in the world, and happy than to find a truly meaningful way to contribute to the world around you.

We want to be like Mr. Copsey when we’re 79.•

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. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  2. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  3. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  4. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  5. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

ADVERTISEMENT