ILNews

IBA: Pause for Professionalism

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The situations are all too familiar – maybe you have just received discovery requests from opposing counsel and they are asking for your clients to provide more information than if they were going through a Senate confirmation hearing. Or you have propounded reasonable discovery requests only to find that your opposing counsel is objecting to every request using just the phrase “We don’t want to provide that. “Or opposing counsel has sent you thousands of pages of documents and, for every discovery response, has stated “It’s probably in there somewhere.”

Discovery can be a time consuming and often very frustrating part of litigation. Often, the rules don’t provide enough information to cover every possible situation and you can often feel like you are adrift in a sea of responses.

As a part of its Pause for Professionalism video series, the Professionalism Committee has recently released a video of Hon. Tim A. Baker, United States District Court, Southern District of Indiana in a video entitled “Civility in Discovery.” Judge Baker provides helpful hints for how to solve discovery disputes as well as some common pitfalls to avoid. Judge Baker also provides some insight for how much judges want parties to resolve their discovery issues without the intervention of the bench. Judge Baker’s comments and tips provide insight to practitioners across the board and can assist with discovery issues in every court.

New videos will be distributed every other month and are available on the IndyBar website at http://www.indybar.org/resources/video-gallery.php. If you have any suggestions for future topics regarding professionalism and civility, please email them to Caren Chopp at cchopp@indybar.org.•

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. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  2. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

  3. The fee increase would be livable except for the 11% increase in spending at the Disciplinary Commission. The Commission should be focused on true public harm rather than going on witch hunts against lawyers who dare to criticize judges.

  4. Marijuana is safer than alcohol. AT the time the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was enacted all major pharmaceutical companies in the US sold marijuana products. 11 Presidents of the US have smoked marijuana. Smoking it does not increase the likelihood that you will get lung cancer. There are numerous reports of canabis oil killing many kinds of incurable cancer. (See Rick Simpson's Oil on the internet or facebook).

  5. The US has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners. Far too many people are sentenced for far too many years in prison. Many of the federal prisoners are sentenced for marijuana violations. Marijuana is safer than alcohol.

ADVERTISEMENT