IBA: Bar Leaders Sought for Board Service

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

It’s already that time of year, when attention turns to nominating the Indianapolis Bar Association Board of Directors slate. Because Indybar members are the greatest resource in identifying future leaders, a request for nominations has been issued. Each Indybar member is encouraged to submit the name(s) of any Indybar attorney member for nomination to any of the following offices:

1st Vice President (serves one-year term and will automatically assume the office of President-elect in 2013)

Secretary (two-year term, 2011 and 2012); and

At-Large Member of Board of Managers (five positions, each two-year terms, 2011 and 2012)

ABA Delegate (one-year term, 2011).

The Nominating Committee will endeavor to choose a slate of nominees, which reflects the Indybar’s geographic, ethnic, minority, gender and practice area diversity while recognizing leadership and service to the Indianapolis Bar Association. Serving on this year’s Nominating Committee are Chair George Plews of Plews Shadley Racher & Braun, Hon. Cale Bradford of the Indiana Court of Appeals, Hon. Annie Christ-Garcia of the Marion Superior Court, Ryan Gardner an attorney at law, Doug Hill of Hill Fulwider McDowell Funk & Matthews, Mary Panszi of Lewis Wagner LLP and Steve Peters of Harrison & Moberly LLP.

In 2009, the Nominating Committee received over 30 letters of interest. A number of goals for the 2011 Board have already been identified and will include the widening of member services, enhanced communications with members regarding the programs and activities available through the Indybar, and the enhancement of the image and awareness of the Indybar and its members in our metropolitan area.

Nominations should be forwarded to Indybar Nominating Committee, 135 N. Pennsylvania Street, Suite 1500, Indianapolis, IN 46204, email, or fax 317-269-1915. They must be received by September 1, 2010.•


Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.