ILNews

Hebenstreit: One Lunch Hour You Shouldn't Skip

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

IBA-hebenstreitHow long has it been since you were a law student? For some of us, it has been quite a few years (or decades, truthfully!), but some memories are still vivid. Do you have those “frustration dreams” where you are entering the lecture hall only to find that it is the final exam and you have not even bought the book? Do you remember the uncertainty and angst of trying to narrow down what type of law you were interested in practicing…and with whom? And trying to answer the questions of your parents and friends about when you are going to land a job?

I, for one, am very happy that those days are behind me. Law school was actually a fun time for me, but that uncertainty and apprehension are still embedded in my memory. Some things never change. The students today have all of those emotions, but also have a very competitive market place. In a legal world of increased specialization, the pressure has increased for them to know what type of law they want to practice, even before they have tried any areas. Many are getting close to the end, with no clear game plan. Others are just starting and want a little direction.

On March 24th, the IndyBar hosts its annual “Take a Law Student to Lunch” from noon to 1 PM at the Conrad Hotel. This lunch is the perfect opportunity to be a mentor for a law student. As a law student in the mid 1970’s, I responded to a notice about a similar event sponsored by the IBA. As a result of the IBA pairing, a lawyer named Tom Cobb called me and invited me to his office so he could share his thoughts about his practice, what it was like to practice Bankruptcy law, and what it was like practicing law in Indianapolis. I had no real idea what Bankruptcy even was, but over 35 years later, I still remember Tom and the fact that that he took an hour of his time to be randomly paired with me and share his experiences with me. You also can make that impact.

Don’t talk yourself out of coming just because you are not the hiring or managing partner or do not have a job to offer the student. While I am sure most would love to land a great job, the students are interested in the program because they want to learn more about lawyers and the profession they are planning to enter. Networking is very important to them.

Every year, the IndyBar receives requests from far more students who are interested in attending than lawyers who agree to host a student. This is quite unfortunate. They want to know what members of the “big” Bar do on a daily basis. We have all been in their shoes. But don’t procrastinate. The IndyBar staff needs to know how many lawyers are willing to be paired with a student. The sooner we know the numbers, the sooner we can confirm for each student that they will, in fact, be able to attend. It only costs a total of $60 which includes your lunch and the lunch of your student. If you are really feeling flush, you may host more that one student.

Once the pairings are made, the student is instructed to contact you. Although it is not a requirement, you may want to consider having the student meet you at your office a few minutes before the lunch. Although our offices are not particularly exciting, many of the students probably have never been in a law office before. Besides, it allows you the opportunity to get to know your student a little better and avoid trying to find your student at the Conrad.

If you are not already convinced to jump on the website and sign up, there is an added bonus. Starting with the March meeting, we are introducing a new feature for our monthly meetings. We will have a tech savvy member of the IndyBar present at least one helpful hint how to better use tech and/or social media to improve your efficiency and your practice.

Let’s consider it a challenge to have at least one lawyer for each student this year. They very much appreciate the contact with our members – and remember, they will be our colleagues and fellow members soon.•

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

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. So that none are misinformed by my posting wihtout a non de plume here, please allow me to state that I am NOT an Indiana licensed attorney, although I am an Indiana resident approved to practice law and represent clients in Indiana's fed court of Nth Dist and before the 7th circuit. I remain licensed in KS, since 1996, no discipline. This must be clarified since the IN court records will reveal that I did sit for and pass the Indiana bar last February. Yet be not confused by the fact that I was so allowed to be tested .... I am not, to be clear in the service of my duty to be absolutely candid about this, I AM NOT a member of the Indiana bar, and might never be so licensed given my unrepented from errors of thought documented in this opinion, at fn2, which likely supports Mr Smith's initial post in this thread: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html

  2. When I served the State of Kansas as Deputy AG over Consumer Protection & Antitrust for four years, supervising 20 special agents and assistant attorneys general (back before the IBLE denied me the right to practice law in Indiana for not having the right stuff and pretty much crushed my legal career) we had a saying around the office: Resist the lure of the ring!!! It was a take off on Tolkiem, the idea that absolute power (I signed investigative subpoenas as a judge would in many other contexts, no need to show probable cause)could corrupt absolutely. We feared that we would overreach constitutional limits if not reminded, over and over, to be mindful to not do so. Our approach in so challenging one another was Madisonian, as the following quotes from the Father of our Constitution reveal: The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse. We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties. I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. Liberty may be endangered by the abuse of liberty, but also by the abuse of power. All men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison, Federalist Papers and other sources: http://www.constitution.org/jm/jm_quotes.htm RESIST THE LURE OF THE RING ALL YE WITH POLITICAL OR JUDICIAL POWER!

  3. My dear Mr Smith, I respect your opinions and much enjoy your posts here. We do differ on our view of the benefits and viability of the American Experiment in Ordered Liberty. While I do agree that it could be better, and that your points in criticism are well taken, Utopia does indeed mean nowhere. I think Madison, Jefferson, Adams and company got it about as good as it gets in a fallen post-Enlightenment social order. That said, a constitution only protects the citizens if it is followed. We currently have a bevy of public officials and judicial agents who believe that their subjectivism, their personal ideology, their elitist fears and concerns and cause celebs trump the constitutions of our forefathers. This is most troubling. More to follow in the next post on that subject.

  4. Yep I am not Bryan Brown. Bryan you appear to be a bigger believer in the Constitution than I am. Were I still a big believer then I might be using my real name like you. Personally, I am no longer a fan of secularism. I favor the confessional state. In religious mattes, it seems to me that social diversity is chaos and conflict, while uniformity is order and peace.... secularism has been imposed by America on other nations now by force and that has not exactly worked out very well.... I think the American historical experiment with disestablishmentarianism is withering on the vine before our eyes..... Since I do not know if that is OK for an officially licensed lawyer to say, I keep the nom de plume.

  5. I am compelled to announce that I am not posting under any Smith monikers here. That said, the post below does have a certain ring to it that sounds familiar to me: http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx

ADVERTISEMENT