ILNews

First female partner in Evansville wins Greshem Award

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The Evansville Bar Association presented Evansville attorney Sheila M. Corcoran with the James Bethel Greshem Award at the bar association's annual Law Day dinner. Corcoran practices with Berger & Berger in Evansville.

The James Bethel Greshem Freedom Award recognizes and honors individuals who have distinguished themselves in activities or careers that have elevated respect for the law, promote freedom, or further the ideals of Law Day. The award's namesake lived in Evansville from 1901 to 1914 and is believed to have been the first American soldier to lose his life in combat during World War I.

Corcoran, who has been an attorney for 28 years, joined her firm in 1979. She was the first woman to become a partner in Evansville at an existing law firm when she was named partner in 1983. She has been a part of a number of legal organizations, including the Indiana State Board of Law Examiners, the Indiana State Bar Association Women in the Law Committee, the ISBA House of Delegates, the ISBA Board of Governors, president of the Evansville Bar Association from 1997-1998, and she is the current president of the Brooks Inn of Court.

She has also served as past chair of the EBA Continuing Legal Education Committee, chair of the probate committee, and as chair of many other continuing legal education programs for attorneys. The EBA also gave Corcoran the Doran Perdue EBA Service Award in 1991 and 2005.

Corcoran also is active in the Court Appointed Special Advocate program and is an active member in her church.
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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. 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?

  4. 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?

  5. 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.

ADVERTISEMENT