ILNews

Hebenstreit: FLYING SOLO????!!!!!

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

IBA-hebenstreitNo matter how much things change, the more they seem to remain the same. Over 30 years ago, my first job out of law school was working for a small firm that served as in-house counsel for Indianapolis Morris Plan, a small industrial loan institution. I learned quite a bit, but really wanted to be in private practice. Through a friend, I was introduced to Bill Richards. Bill had a thriving practice and needed a “young guy” to help him with some of his work. That opportunity afforded me the means to learn how to practice as well as allowed me to begin to develop a practice on my own.

Bill was a terrific mentor; he did not preach or instruct. Rather he let me watch him and ask questions. He wanted me to figure it out on my own, but was always more than willing to confirm what I thought the law or proper procedure really was. He helped me learn how to practice law and to do it within the economic constraints of our clients. He was, and is, a very practical lawyer. To this day, Bill is a friend and a sounding board for legal or other life questions.

I got lucky. Sometimes things work out and sometimes they don’t. In the current legal market, there are many lawyers, both new and more experienced, who find that they have to “go it on their own.” Perhaps they just were admitted to the Bar and have not found a permanent position, or maybe their former firm has changed, and mid career, they find themselves downsized. This is not a phenomenon only in Indianapolis. Regardless, it is a new and scary experience, particularly without one or more mentors who can ease that transition. The law schools do a pretty good job of teaching us what the law may be, but not how to actually practice law. Not much information is provided on the mechanics of opening an office and managing both the legal needs of the client (if we are lucky enough to attract some) as well as the business side of handling a practice.

Never fear, the IndyBar is here to help. Over 34% of our members are categorized as “solo or small firm” (which is defined as up to five attorneys), and we hope to be of benefit and service to our solo and small firm members. In the past few years, the Solo and Small Firm Section has become invigorated through energetic and creative leadership. They observed the need and have jumped into the fray to help. Recognizing that technology is critically important, the Section dispatched two members to the ABA Tech show in Chicago to acquire ideas. For those of you who have an IT person or IT department, technology is not a big deal, but to a small firm person, it is daunting to find a person or company able to set up a network, find case management and billing software, and create a website. To whom can you turn and what fees can you expect to pay?

This year, thanks to Kenan Farrell, there were two social media mini seminars. He covered LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter and blogging tools. The second session was billed as a more advanced program. It covered information gathering and how to use social media to stay abreast with both clients as well as competitors. Marketing and appropriate tech etiquette were also covered. On a more substantive basis, the program covered using social media for voir dire and evidence issues.

Under the leadership of Jeff Meunier, the Senior Counsel Division hosted its program entitled “Hanging out Your Shingle-How Do I Keep the Phone Ringing.” It covered such practical information as law firm entity formation, malpractice issues, trust accounting and lease negotiations. The more advanced topics included website design, Google placement and search engine optimization. Very helpful information for an attorney (or group) just starting out.

The Solo and Small Firm Section will be hosting its second annual all-day program on Nov. 10th entitled “Surviving and Thriving.” This year the Section has lined up a very impressive faculty of speakers and is hosting three separate tracks. The practice management track features cloud computing, marketing, and Internet advertising rules. The substantive tracks are staffed with experienced practitioners who will share their practical knowledge about most common practice areas. The agenda and sign up are on the IndyBar website.

One new development in the IndyBar is for different Sections to collaborate in order to reach a greater audience. Several weeks ago, the Senior Counsel Division partnered with the Young Lawyers Division to host a speed networking event. Experienced attorneys and judges manned the various tables, and the younger lawyers spent about 10 minutes at each table and then moved to another table. The goal was to allow the younger members to inquire about specific practice areas as well as to meet lawyers and judges who may be able to serve as their mentors. The senior lawyers and judges invited the younger members to call upon them at any time for advice or assistance. The program was followed by a reception where all of the participants were able to mingle. It was well received and will certainly be repeated next year.

Striking out on your own is both daunting and exhilarating. We are here to help make that jump more comfortable. Be sure to take full advantage of your IndyBar membership, maybe you will find your own Bill Richards.•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Practical side of the law
    Bill was a mentor to me as young lawyer, too. Over the years he has helped several new lawyers learn the practical side of the practice of law.

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT