Ice Miller sees big gain in attorneys employed

June 11, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The National Law Journal has released its list of the 350 largest U.S. law firms in 2012 and Indianapolis-based Ice Miller LLP tops one area – gains by percentage of lawyers.

According to the NLJ, Ice Miller went from 219 attorneys in 2011 to 301 in 2012 – a 37.4 percent change. Much of that increase could be attributed to Ice Miller merging with Schottenstein Zox and Dunn Co., LPA in late 2011, a deal that was finalized in January 2012.

Ice Miller ranks No. 143 on the list, up nearly 40 spots from the 2011 rank. It’s not the highest-ranked Indianapolis-based firm. That distinction goes to Barnes & Thornburg LLP, which went up five spots in the 2012 list to No. 87. Other firms with Indianapolis as their largest U.S. office include Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP at No. 188; Hall Render Killian Heath & Lyman P.C. at No. 238; and Krieg DeVault LLP at No. 320.

Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart, which has an Indianapolis office, saw a big leap in associate hiring in 2012. It had 221 associates in 2012 as compared to 177 in 2011, a nearly 25 percent increase. The firm’s website currently lists six associates in the Indianapolis office.

You can view the complete list on the NLJ’s website.
 

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

  2. 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?

  3. 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"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT