ILNews

High court recognized for law day program

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court has received an award from the American Bar Association for its Law Day program this year that focused on Abraham Lincoln as a lawyer. The high court received one of the three 2009 Law Day Outstanding Activity awards.

As part of the "Why Lincoln Was a Lawyer" program, judges, attorneys, paralegals, and law students visited classrooms around the state sharing Lincoln's ideas about the importance of law and its role in shaping American citizens. The program reached approximately 33,000 students in kindergarten through 12th grade.

The May 1 Law Day classroom visits were the culmination of a yearlong project on the part of the Supreme Court's education outreach division, "Courts in the Classroom." Law Day programs across the country celebrated the bicentennial of Lincoln's birth. The 2010 Law Day theme is "Law in the 21st Century: Enduring Traditions, Emerging Challenges."

ADVERTISEMENT

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT