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. Bob Leonard killed two people named Jennifer and Dion Longworth. There were no Smiths involved.

  2. Being on this journey from the beginning has convinced me the justice system really doesn't care about the welfare of the child. The trial court judge knew the child belonged with the mother. The father having total disregard for the rules of the court. Not only did this cost the mother and child valuable time together but thousands in legal fees. When the child was with the father the mother paid her child support. When the child was finally with the right parent somehow the father got away without having to pay one penny of child support. He had to be in control. Since he withheld all information regarding the child's welfare he put her in harms way. Mother took the child to the doctor when she got sick and was totally embarrassed she knew nothing regarding the medical information especially the allergies, The mother texted the father (from the doctors office) and he replied call his attorney. To me this doesn't seem like a concerned father. Seeing the child upset when she had to go back to the father. What upset me the most was finding out the child sleeps with him. Sometimes in the nude. Maybe I don't understand all the rules of the law but I thought this was also morally wrong. A concerned parent would allow the child to finish the school year. Say goodbye to her friends. It saddens me to know the child will not have contact with the sisters, aunts, uncles and the 87 year old grandfather. He didn't allow it before. Only the mother is allowed to talk to the child. I don't think now will be any different. I hope the decision the courts made would've been the same one if this was a member of their family. Someday this child will end up in therapy if allowed to remain with the father.

  3. Ok attorney Straw ... if that be a good idea ... And I am not saying it is ... but if it were ... would that be ripe prior to her suffering an embarrassing remand from the Seventh? Seems more than a tad premature here soldier. One putting on the armor should not boast liked one taking it off.

  4. The judge thinks that she is so cute to deny jurisdiction, but without jurisdiction, she loses her immunity. She did not give me any due process hearing or any discovery, like the Middlesex case provided for that lawyer. Because she has refused to protect me and she has no immunity because she rejected jurisdiction, I am now suing her in her district.

  5. Sam Bradbury was never a resident of Lafayette he lived in rural Tippecanoe County, Thats an error.

ADVERTISEMENT