Happy anniversary First Impressions

June 2, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

IL reporter Rebecca Berfanger wrote this post.

Two years ago today, Indiana Lawyer announced the blog was in session.

First Impressions was started and continues to offer legal news of interest to our readers, whether it’s an event, an achievement  of a bar association, an observation from a reporting assignment, or some other information that we found interesting even though it didn’t quite fit into the editorial mix of the IL daily or printed edition newspaper.

When I looked at the statistics of the blog since the first post on June 2, 2008, the highest ranked entries have been about disciplinary actions – whether that’s specifically named attorneys or firms, or attorneys who didn’t complete required CLE or didn’t pay their registration fees.

Posts about law firm mergers, hiring updates,  and departures are also pretty popular. (Note: We don’t report rumors, so if it is in Indiana Lawyer as a blog, online or print story, it was verified by a reliable source before we posted or published it).

We’ve also had blogs and other articles linked to readers’ Facebook pages, and our Facebook page posts a link to the blog every time it is updated.

We haven’t had many comments in response to blogs – unless the blog has a very positive or very negative message to share, or if the commenter had a personal connection to the story and wanted to chime in. But we do read the comments and respond when it’s appropriate.

But we’d like our readers to know that if they don’t want to comment directly to the blog, they can still e-mail or call the editorial staff with their comments on a specific blog post – or any other article we publish online or in print. Our e-mails are linked to every story we write. And if you’re not sure who to contact, we’re a small enough staff that if you e-mail one of us your message will be directed to the right person.

If there’s anything you think this blog is missing, we are open to ideas from readers. In fact, some of our blogs have started out as an e-mail or call from a firm or bar association, or a link to an article in a newspaper that we may have missed without a reader’s input.

While we’ve yet to receive a lengthy e-mail exchange between a potential employer and employee, like the one my former employer’s blog recently posted as a lesson in civility, we wouldn’t be entirely opposed to it if there was something everyone could learn from it and would give both sides a chance to respond.

What do you think of First Impressions? Any suggestions? Criticisms? Compliments?
 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Got courage?
    How about some posts questioning the Indiana court and thus playing the role that our nation's Founders envisioned for the media?
    Reporting on the experience of this ten year veteran attorney through the political correctness of JLAP for starters. See www.archangelinstitute.org for details.

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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. 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.

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

ADVERTISEMENT