Firm ‘greens’ new space

August 28, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Going “green” has been a hot topic for the past couple of years and plenty of Indiana firms are getting in on the act. Firms are seeing more of a focus on environmental and green legal issues, and Ice Miller even started a green practice group earlier this year.

On top of that, many Indiana firms are doing their part to reduce waste and conserve energy by donating old office furniture and books and implementing recycling programs in the office.

Indianapolis-based Bose McKinney & Evans made a point to be as green as possible when they decided to relocate a couple blocks away to a bigger office. Even though the firm will have more square footage, it wants to reduce its environmental footprint as much as possible.

Instead of pitching all their old office furniture and buying new desks, chairs, filing cabinets, etc., the firm is reusing what it can and donating the rest. If the firm has to buy new furniture, the firm is trying to buy as much as they can that is made in Indiana in order to reduce shipping distances, chief marketing officer Jennifer Walker said. The firm also tried to use natural, recycled, and local materials for flooring and wall coverings when possible, featuring Indiana limestone on its reception desk and compressed bamboo flooring in the new conference center.

The firm worked with the contractor preparing their new office space to make sure they reused as much materials as possible, installed Energy Star equipment, auto-shut off faucets in the restrooms, and included more side lights and transoms to bring natural light into the offices.

Kudos to Bose McKinney and all of the other firms for trying to do what they can to conserve energy, recycle, and lessen their firms’ impact on the environment. Yes, “going green” is definitely trendy right now, but it’s a good trend to be a part of and one that will hopefully stick around.
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. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  2. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  3. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT