ILNews

IBA Frontlines - 9/28/12

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Don’t Miss Surviving & Thriving

The IndyBar’s Surviving & Thriving event is a must-attend program for any local solo or small firm practitioners. In just one day you’ll get practical advice, answers to questions, education on various substantive law topics and important tips on how to build a successful business. Relevant programming combined with respected local speakers make Surviving and Thriving an essential and cost effective program for all solo and small firm practitioners. 6.0 hours of CLE credit are available in the full day program, plus registration includes a free post-seminar cocktail reception at Adobo Grill! Go to www.indybar.org to view the agenda and to access online registration

Rule Change Orders Issued

The Indiana Supreme Court has issued several orders that amend the rules of court. Amendments include changes to the Rules of Appellate Procedure, the Indiana Admission and Discipline Rules, Indiana Administrative Rules and Indiana Rules of Criminal Procedure and Trial Procedure. To view the orders, which take effect January 1, 2013, go to www.in.gov/judiciary/2784.htm.

Nominate a Colleague for an IndyBar Recognition Award

Do you know of a deserving IndyBar member who has worked hard for his or her community? Nominate him or her for an IndyBar award! Nominations are being accepted for the following IndyBar awards: the Dr. John Morton Finney Jr. Award for Excellence in Legal Education and the IndyBar Pro Bono Awards, which are presented in five categories: Practicing Attorney, Aiding Individuals; Practicing Attorney, Aiding Entities; Law Firm; Law Student and Paralegal. Go to www.indybar.org for a nomination form. Nominations are due October 5, 2012. The awards will be presented at the Recognition Luncheon on Thursday, November 8.

Judge Martha Wentworth Named Chair of Pro Bono Commission

Indiana Tax Court Judge Martha Blood Wentworth has been appointed by the Indiana Supreme Court as Chair of the Pro Bono Commission. In addition, the Supreme Court also appointed the Honorable David Avery, of the Allen Superior Court as Vice-Chair of the Commission. Each will serve a three-year term, which will end in 2015.

New Rules Proposed for Marion County Small Claims Courts

The comment period is open for new rules proposed for Marion County Small Claims Courts. Go to http://goo.gl/Ms74W to access the proposed rules. Comments can be made through October 5. The new rules will be adopted, modified or rejected by October 12. If adopted, the rules will take effect on January 1.

Law Student Division Seeking Executive Board Members

The nomination period for the 2012-2013 Indianapolis Bar Association Law Student Division Executive Board has begun. There are a total of eight At-Large positions available. This is a unique and exciting opportunity for students to be involved with the planning and implementation of many IndyBar student educational and networking functions as well as an opportunity to enhance leadership skills. Applications and statements of interest are due October 15. Visit www.indybar.org for more information

The IndyBar Legal Directory is Here!

Pre-ordered legal directories are available for pickup at the IndyBar office during normal business hours (Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.). If you selected to have your legal directory shipped, watch your mailbox. Shipped orders will begin arriving September 3. Forget to order your copy? Go to www.indybar.org/store to place your order today. Directories are $55 plus tax and shipping, if applicable.

Need Your APC Credit?

The IndyBar has the Applied Professionalism Course for you. Featuring esteemed presenters and interactive sessions, the IndyBar’s Applied Professionalism Course on Thursday, November 1 is the perfect way to satisfy this credit requirement for attorneys in their first three years of practice...PLUS, registration fees for this day-long program are even lower now than in past years! Access the full agenda and online registration at www.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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Falk said “At this point, at this minute, we’ll savor this particular victory.” “It certainly is a historic week on this front,” Cockrum said. “What a delight ... “Happy Independence Day to the women of the state of Indiana,” WOW. So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)

  2. congratulations on such balanced journalism; I also love how fetus disposal affects women's health protection, as covered by Roe...

  3. It truly sickens me every time a case is compared to mine. The Indiana Supreme Court upheld my convictions based on a finding of “hidden threats.” The term “hidden threat” never appeared until the opinion in Brewington so I had no way of knowing I was on trial for making hidden threats because Dearborn County Prosecutor F Aaron Negangard argued the First Amendment didn't protect lies. Negangard convened a grand jury to investigate me for making “over the top” and “unsubstantiated” statements about court officials, not hidden threats of violence. My indictments and convictions were so vague, the Indiana Court of Appeals made no mention of hidden threats when they upheld my convictions. Despite my public defender’s closing arguments stating he was unsure of exactly what conduct the prosecution deemed to be unlawful, Rush found that my lawyer’s trial strategy waived my right to the fundamental error of being tried for criminal defamation because my lawyer employed a strategy that attempted to take advantage of Negangard's unconstitutional criminal defamation prosecution against me. Rush’s opinion stated the prosecution argued two grounds for conviction one constitutional and one not, however the constitutional true threat “argument” consistently of only a blanket reading of subsection 1 of the intimidation statute during closing arguments, making it impossible to build any kind of defense. Of course intent was impossible for my attorney to argue because my attorney, Rush County Chief Public Defender Bryan Barrett refused to meet with me prior to trial. The record is littered with examples of where I made my concerns known to the trial judge that I didn’t know the charges against me, I did not have access to evidence, all while my public defender refused to meet with me. Special Judge Brian Hill, from Rush Superior Court, refused to address the issue with my public defender and marched me to trial without access to evidence or an understanding of the indictments against me. Just recently the Indiana Public Access Counselor found that four over four years Judge Hill has erroneously denied access to the grand jury audio from my case, the most likely reason being the transcription of the grand jury proceedings omitted portions of the official audio record. The bottom line is any intimidation case involves an action or statement that is debatably a threat of physical violence. There were no such statements in my case. The Indiana Supreme Court took partial statements I made over a period of 41 months and literally connected them with dots… to give the appearance that the statements were made within the same timeframe and then claimed a person similarly situated would find the statements intimidating while intentionally leaving out surrounding contextual factors. Even holding the similarly situated test was to be used in my case, the prosecution argued that the only intent of my public writings was to subject the “victims” to ridicule and hatred so a similarly situated jury instruction wouldn't even have applied in my case. Chief Justice Rush wrote the opinion while Rush continued to sit on a committee with one of the alleged victims in my trial and one of the judges in my divorce, just as she'd done for the previous 7+ years. All of this information, including the recent PAC opinion against the Dearborn Superior Court II can be found on my blog www.danbrewington.blogspot.com.

  4. On a related note, I offered the ICLU my cases against the BLE repeatedly, and sought their amici aid repeatedly as well. Crickets. Usually not even a response. I am guessing they do not do allegations of anti-Christian bias? No matter how glaring? I have posted on other links the amicus brief that did get filed (search this ezine, e.g., Kansas attorney), read the Thomas More Society brief to note what the ACLU ran from like vampires from garlic. An Examiner pledged to advance diversity and inclusion came right out on the record and demanded that I choose Man's law or God's law. I wonder, had I been asked to swear off Allah ... what result then, ICLU? Had I been found of bad character and fitness for advocating sexual deviance, what result then ICLU? Had I been lifetime banned for posting left of center statements denigrating the US Constitution, what result ICLU? Hey, we all know don't we? Rather Biased.

  5. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

ADVERTISEMENT