ILNews

Hebenstreit: Thanks

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

IBA-hebenstreitThree hundred sixty five days sounds like a long time, but 2011 has flown by very quickly. This is my last column in Indiana Lawyer. It has been a bit of a challenge coming up with fresh ideas to write about every other week. Now I know why the term of President is only one year–no person can come up with more new ideas for this column. I have no idea how Andy Rooney came up with a new idea each week for all the years he was on 60 Minutes–unless of course it was because he was paid to do it! Strangely enough, I have found that I have actually enjoyed writing the column.

This has been a productive and enjoyable year. After spending two full years as First Vice President and then President Elect, it would seem that every President has learned all there is to learn about the IndyBar. Not so. In past years, I was copied on countless emails, but this year my name was at the top of those emails and someone expected a response. It is amazing how much occurs in a year.

At the beginning of the year, I wrote that I hoped the theme for 2011 would be based on Collegiality and Service. Collegiality has become more important as the world gets more digital and immediate. Lawyers are great people and all of us are better served if we maintain good relations with our colleagues. Hopefully the IndyBar has provided you with an avenue for creating and maintaining friendships with other lawyers.

In addition to the Board, there are 17 sections of the IndyBar that are practice area specific. Four divisions exist and there are 22 committees. All have a specific purpose, and each has been very active this year. If you were too busy this year to take advantage of the services, perhaps next year you will be able to do so. Counting meetings, CLE programming and events, the IndyBar has hosted 312 activities–almost one a day. If you want to be further educated, take a look at the midyear report that was created this year highlighting the events and accomplishments of the Sections. We conducted quarterly meetings of the chairs, and I very much appreciate the high level of activity, energy and creativity of each chair this year.

The marquee events of the year were the Bench Bar Conference in June, the Las Vegas Destination CLE in October, the Racing Attorney’s Conference (TRAC) in April, the Women and the Law Symposium in October, and the Diversity Job Fair in August. An enormous amount of planning and execution was necessary to insure that each was a great success.

The Judges Roundtable was a new program started this year. Three separate events were held dealing with general civil law, criminal law, and family law. Thanks to the judges who volunteered to participate in the Roundtables, particularly at 8 a.m. Another new event was the collaborative effort of the Senior Counsel Division and the Young Lawyers Division for their Speed Networking event. Thanks to the work of the Communications Study Committee, the IndyBar will have new and more varied means of communicating with each of you. The website of the IndyBar was further refined this year, and a protocol was adopted dealing with Social Media issues for our Facebook and Twitter activity. Additionally, the Indy LawyerFinder is set to launch in January. It is an online search option for potential clients to locate and hire our members and is in addition to the existing Lawyer Referral Service.

The work of the Bar in providing good quality and relevant service to the members is accomplished by the time and effort of hundreds of volunteers. Thanks to all for the individual contributions that have made the Bar better. I want to thank all Vice Presidents, Officers, and members of the Board and especially our counsel, David Herzog and April Sellers. Special thanks to Julie and the staff. For any of you who have had the pleasure of working with them, you know what consummate professionals they all are. Finally to Robyn for letting me slide on all of the home chores I neglected all year.

Make sure to input January 12th in your Outlook calendar. That is the date of the Installation Luncheon where Scott Chinn will be installed as the 2012 President. Next year will be a great one. I have very much enjoyed working closely with Scott this year, and look forward to working with both Scott as well as his Board in 2012. I will particularly look forward to reading his President’s column next year. Happy New Year.•

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