ILNews

IBA: 25th Anniversary of the Women and the Law Division: A Symposium on Women, Law & Leadership

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

By Nicolette Mendenhall and Christina Clark, Co-Vice Chairs of the WLD’s Symposium Planning Committee

clark-christina-mug.jpg Clark
mendenhall-nicolette-mug.jpg Mendenhall

This year marks an exciting milestone for IndyBar’s Women and Law Division. Twenty-five years ago, a number of visionary lawyers in our community founded WLD to create opportunities for professional growth and personal connections among women lawyers. A quarter of a century later, WLD remains a strong presence in the Indianapolis Bar Association. From continuing legal education to philanthropy to networking, WLD offers many ways to get involved, gain substantive and practical legal knowledge, draw on the wisdom of other diverse and experienced lawyers, and make enduring connections with other members of the bar in both private and public practice.

In recognition and celebration of the achievements of our predecessors, WLD has, through the combined efforts of many in the Indianapolis legal community, developed a day-long CLE symposium on leadership taking place at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in downtown Indianapolis. The event kicks off on October 5th with a networking reception and keynote dinner. The symposium programming continues throughout the day on October 6th.

A plan envisioned in 2009 by then-Chair of WLD, Leona Frank, the symposium has developed into a series of discussions that will gather the Indianapolis legal community’s best and brightest lawyers and judges to speak about the pressing issues that impact women lawyers, as well as hot legal topics of interest to all lawyers. The symposium will feature no fewer than nine past winners of the Antoinette Dakin Leach Award — an award given by WLD to honor trailblazers and mentors — who will impart their wisdom and experience in a series titled “Building Your Success.” WLD will present the 2011 Antoinette Dakin Leach award to Judge Margret Robb at the keynote dinner on October 5th.

WLD is pleased to introduce Martha West and Roberta Liebenberg as keynote dinner and lunch speakers for the event. Martha, Professor of Law Emerita from University of California-Davis and a graduate of Indiana University School of Law-Bloomington will speak on women’s advances in the legal profession, practical realities of non-work commitments, and strategies for continued progress. Roberta, a Senior Partner at Fine Kaplan and Black RPC, is the immediate past chair of the American Bar Association’s Commission on Women in the Profession and will speak on the increasing number of women in positions of power and leadership in all practice settings.

With topics like negotiation and litigation skills, mentoring, marketing and branding, social media, and human trafficking, WLD’s symposium on women, law and leadership has much to offer lawyers of all levels of experience and areas of practice. For more information, including details on how to register, visit www.indybar.org. Limited scholarships are available (apply by September 2), and early-bird registration rates are available until September 8.

If you would like additional information about the event or how you can contribute, contact Nicolette at nicolette@tucker-hester.com or Christina at Christina.Clark@bakerd.com.•

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
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The $320,000 is the amount the school spent in litigating two lawsuits: One to release the report involving John Trimble (as noted in the story above) and one defending the discrimination lawsuit. The story above does not mention the amount spent to defend the discrimination suit, that's why the numbers don't match. Thanks for reading.

  2. $160k? Yesterday the figure was $320k. Which is it Indiana Lawyer. And even more interesting, which well connected law firm got the (I am guessing) $320k, six time was the fired chancellor received. LOL. (From yesterday's story, which I guess we were expected to forget overnight ... "According to records obtained by the Journal & Courier, Purdue spent $161,812, beginning in July 2012, in a state open records lawsuit and $168,312, beginning in April 2013, for defense in a federal lawsuit. Much of those fees were spent battling court orders to release an independent investigation by attorney John Trimble that found Purdue could have handled the forced retirement better")

  3. The numbers are harsh; 66 - 24 in the House, 40 - 10 in the Senate. And it is an idea pushed by the Democrats. Dead end? Ummm not necessarily. Just need to go big rather than go home. Nuclear option. Give it to the federal courts, the federal courts will ram this down our throats. Like that other invented right of the modern age, feticide. Rights too precious to be held up by 2000 years of civilization hang in the balance. Onward!

  4. I'm currently seeing someone who has a charge of child pornography possession, he didn't know he had it because it was attached to a music video file he downloaded when he was 19/20 yrs old and fought it for years until he couldn't handle it and plead guilty of possession. He's been convicted in Illinois and now lives in Indiana. Wouldn't it be better to give them a chance to prove to the community and their families that they pose no threat? He's so young and now because he was being a kid and downloaded music at a younger age, he has to pay for it the rest of his life? It's unfair, he can't live a normal life, and has to live in fear of what people can say and do to him because of something that happened 10 years ago? No one deserves that, and no one deserves to be labeled for one mistake, he got labeled even though there was no intent to obtain and use the said content. It makes me so sad to see someone I love go through this and it makes me holds me back a lot because I don't know how people around me will accept him...second chances should be given to those under the age of 21 at least so they can be given a chance to live a normal life as a productive member of society.

  5. It's just an ill considered remark. The Sup Ct is inherently political, as it is a core part of government, and Marbury V Madison guaranteed that it would become ever more so Supremely thus. So her remark is meaningless and she just should have not made it.... what she could have said is that Congress is a bunch of lazys and cowards who wont do their jobs so the hard work of making laws clear, oftentimes stops with the Sups sorting things out that could have been resolved by more competent legislation. That would have been a more worthwhile remark and maybe would have had some relevance to what voters do, since voters cant affect who gets appointed to the supremely un-democratic art III courts.

ADVERTISEMENT