Bar network lets lawyers lend a hand

August 6, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Several bars across the country have set up support networks for legal professionals who need assistance with big and small requests. The inspiration for the program came from a Louisiana model that took off after Hurricane Katrina.

The National Law Journal writes about SOLACE: Support of Lawyers/Legal Personnel – All Concerns Encouraged, which was created in 2002 by U.S. District Judge Jay Zainey. Zainey reached out to an attorney friend whose wife, also an attorney, suffered a brain aneurysm. The wife survived and the friend suggested a network where the legal community could ask for help in times of need.

When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in 2005, the program gained steam as lawyers around the state responded to requests for things like law library access and housing. The program has expanded and taken on new names in some states, like Ohio, but the idea is the same: attorneys can reach out to other lawyers for help when needed. Those requests may be something as simple as trying to donate legal books to needing help with a medical evacuation.

Zainey said requests are never supposed to be directly for money, but some in-kind requests such as frequent flier miles can be allowed.

Is there any type of program like this in Indiana for attorneys? If not, should Indiana look to the SOLACE model and implement a program?
 

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
  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