McKinney 3L raises funds so man can keep guide dog

December 19, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Thanks to an Indiana law student’s study break, a New York City-area man will be able to keep his longtime companion and guide dog.

3L Grant Kirsh saw Cecil Williams’ story on the news while taking a break from studying for his finals at Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law.  Williams made headlines after falling onto the tracks at a subway station in Harlem after fainting. Williams, who is blind, has a guide dog, Orlando. The nearly 11-year-old dog jumped onto the tracks to try to help Williams. He clung to his dog as a train passed over them. Amazingly, Williams and the dog escaped relatively unscathed. Williams had some cuts and bruises, and Orlando wasn’t injured.

That’s the feel good part of the news story. The sad part is that because of Orlando’s age, he has to retire and Williams’ insurance will not cover the cost of caring for Orlando and a new guide dog.

That’s where Kirsh comes in and the story takes a happy twist. He turned to indiegogo, a crowd-source funding site, and created an account to raise money so that Williams can keep Orlando. The account was started Tuesday and it already has hit its goal of $50,000. As of Thursday morning, people have contributed nearly $66,000, all of which will go to Williams.

“I just saw an opportunity to do something and ran with it,” Kirsh said. He tweeted so much about it, and those tweets were retweeted so frequently, that by 8:30 a.m. on Dec. 18, he’d hit his limit for Twitter for the day.

Kirsh’s motivation for helping a man he never met comes from his love of dogs. He has two dogs, one of which was homeless.

Kirsh worked for seven years in commercial real estate before attending law school. His father and uncle practice at their adoption firm Kirsh & Kirsh, which Grant is planning on joining after graduation.

If you’re interested in donating to Williams’ account, visit the indiegogo website. The fundraising ends Dec. 31.

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. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT