ILNews

Hebenstreit: Collaborating to Provide Services for All

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

IBA-hebenstreitService has always been important, but in today’s frenetic world, receiving good and prompt service is critical. We stopped in a new restaurant for breakfast the other day (no, I am not trying to compete with Jenny Lukemeyer and Fred Vaiana in the restaurant review business). Everything looked good from the outside, but when we were told that they did not offer crepes for breakfast, only lunch and dinner, it seemed a little odd. But, when their espresso machine was not working, and they could not make any espresso drinks, things started to go downhill pretty quickly. Our server was polite, and I may try it again, but probably not immediately. Service is important.

This year, one of my goals for the IndyBar has been to provide impeccable service to you, the members. Thanks to the hard work of Aubrey Kuchar and the Membership Committee, we are close to our goal of exceeding 5000 members by year end. Hopefully the new members have joined because of what we offer to them and the long time members still believe they get good value for their membership.

With 5000 attorneys as the audience, it takes a variety of services to be of benefit to everyone. Most of our members interact with the IndyBar through the various practice sections. It is natural to associate with those who have common interests and practice areas. It is also the means by which many of us receive our CLE.

Every quarter, we have a meeting with all of the Section and Division chairs. The purpose is to learn what other Sections are doing and share ideas. These meetings are quite enlightening. In fact, this year, I asked all chairs to prepare a short report detailing what they had accomplished during the first half of the year. Soon you will receive your electronic copy of those reports. I was astounded at the number of events and CLE seminars hosted by the Sections. All of the Sections have been quite active and busy this year; however there are a few developments that are worth sharing.

The Women and the Law Section decided to host an all day seminar dealing with a variety of issues that are very important and germane to their members. They have secured a nationally recognized expert to be the keynote speaker at the opening dinner on Thursday evening. The following day is filled with a wide variety of substantive sessions taught by an impressive lineup of presenters. This is a major undertaking for a Section.

This year collaboration has been a new and successful tool for providing service to the members. Due to the overlap in practice areas, the Estate Planning & Administration Section planned, and held, a joint event with the Family Law Section. It started with CLE of interest to both groups and then followed with a reception designed to allow the members of each section to interact and network with each other. They are planning on a repeat next year.

In addition to CLE some of the sections have collaborated to serve the public. On September 15th, the second annual Mediation Day will be held. It is a joint effort of the ADR Section and the Pro Bono Section designed to assist lower income and indigent litigants—a benefit to both sections and the general public.

As a young attorney, I was attending a pre trial conference with the late Judge Walter Bell. A legal issue came up and the Judge said he would refer to his “rolodex encyclopedia.’” Over the years, Judge Bell had created a rolodex full of the names and phone numbers of attorneys he could call upon to get a quick answer about a specific area of the law. The Senior Counsel Division and Young Lawyers Division have collaborated on a first ever “speed dating “ event. It will allow younger lawyers to stop by a table manned by members of the Senior Counsel Division who have certain expertise in a given area. The young attorneys can ask any questions about the given area of law and gain the wisdom and practice knowledge of the senior members. In addition to providing substantive answers, the event is designed to be an opportunity for the younger members to meet face to face with possible mentors and to acquire their names and phone numbers (or e mail addresses) so they can build their own “Outlook encyclopedia.”

As practice areas become more specialized, I hope that the Sections and Divisions will continue to look for commonality to collaborate with each other. Joint events provide not only enhanced service to the members, but also an opportunity for collegiality among the lawyers.•

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  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