About

December 3, 2007
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Welcome to First Impressions, Indiana Lawyer’s legal blog. Your host is Jennifer Mehalik, Indiana Lawyer’s Web editor. Mehalik grew up in Indianapolis and attended Indiana University in Bloomington. After writing for other IBJ Media publications, Mehalik joined Indiana Lawyer as a reporter and now handles e-media for the publication. She finds it ironic that her least favorite part of media law was reading court opinions, which she now does on a daily basis and actually enjoys. If you have a good idea for a blog topic, contact her at 317-472-5234 or jmehalik@ibj.com
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Regarding the three attorneys who were disciplined for using a trade name in their practice, few attorneys know that Indiana is one of only two states that does not permit attorneys to practice under a trade name. The other state is Arizona. (Until recently, Indiana and Arizona also shared another singular distinction - the only two states in the continental United States to not observe daylight savings.)

    With the permitted use of law firm logos, slogans, and creative web addresses, along with the permitted use of law firm names of lawyers long since deceased (which are in essence, trade names), is it now time for Indiana to do as it did with the daylight savings ban and join with the rest of the US by scrapping the ban on using trade names?

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. Hail to our Constitutional Law Expert in the Executive Office! “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law,” Obama said.

  2. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  3. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  4. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  5. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

ADVERTISEMENT