ILNews

IBA Frontlines 1/30/13

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Comments Invited on Proposed Changes to Indiana Bar Examination

The Indiana State Board of Law Examiners is proposing changes in the subjects that are tested on the Indiana essay portion of the Indiana Bar Examination. A description of the proposed changes and instructions on how to submit comments can found on the Board of Law Examiners’ website at www.in.gov/judiciary/ble. Interested parties will have until May 31, 2013, to submit comments. Members of the bar are also encouraged to contact Chris Hickey, chair of the IndyBar Review Steering Committee, at ch@rubin-levin.com to voice any feedback or concerns.

IndyBar Unveils the Attorney Apprentice Program

The IndyBar’s Lawyers Helping Lawyers Task Force has taken a proactive approach to provide substantive knowledge and practical experience to new and less experienced attorneys with the creation of the Attorney Apprentice Program. The Attorney Apprentice Program is designed to provide hands on training to new and less experienced attorneys and those looking to expand their practice. The program features a core curriculum aimed at developing attorney business and marketing skills as well as substantive programming in a legal track of the participant’s choice—Civil Litigation, Transactional Practice or Criminal Practice and Procedure.

Interested in attending but unsure of whether you can afford registration fees? The Indianapolis Bar Foundation has graciously funded scholarships for this valuable training. Visit www.indybar.org to learn more about the program and to register online.

Monthly Meetings of Members are Back!

Escape from your office to enjoy an hour with your colleagues and engaging programs and speakers at this year’s lineup of IndyBar member gatherings. February’s luncheon on Thursday, Feb. 21 will feature special guest speaker Allison Melangton of the Indiana Sports Corporation. Go to www.indybar.org to register and view the full schedule of member gatherings.

Thank You, Legal Line Volunteers!

Thank you to the following O’Koon Hintermeister attorneys who graciously volunteered their time to staff Legal Line, the IndyBar’s monthly call-in legal advice program, in January: James Bolen, Anna Buschmann, Steve Gottlieb, Jeff Hintermeister, Vicki Merriman, Adina Teska, Joel Thorp, Linda Villegas and Martin Weiser. These volunteers took 66 calls from members of the public seeking free legal guidance.

Weekly IndyBar Bill Watches Available

As a service to all IndyBar members, the Legislative Committee reviews pending legislation and, with the approval of the IndyBar Board of Directors, monitors progress. Each week, a new summary of legislation being monitored by the committee is made available to members and posted online at http://www.indybar.org/news/bill-watch.php.

It’s Dues Renewal Time!

Don’t miss out on a great year with the IndyBar: renew for 2013 today! Convenient online renewal is available at www.indybar.org. Make sure to check out and take advantage of the IndyBar’s great new offerings for 2013, including the new Indy Attorneys Network section and the Plus CLE Pilot Program!

Giving Thanks: Pay it Forward by Offering Your Expertise

Through the Low Asset Wills Program, Indianapolis Bar Association attorneys draft wills for free as a service to the community. Qualified individuals can meet privately with an attorney who will draft a last will & testament and advance directives for them. For more information on the program and how to get involved, visit www.indybar.org or contact 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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Living in South Bend, I travel to Michigan a lot. Virtually every gas station sells cold beer there. Many sell the hard stuff too. Doesn't seem to be a big deal there.

  2. Mr. Ricker, how foolish of you to think that by complying with the law you would be ok. Don't you know that Indiana is a state that welcomes monopolies, and that Indiana's legislature is the one entity in this state that believes monopolistic practices (such as those engaged in by Indiana Association of Beverage Retailers) make Indiana a "business-friendly" state? How can you not see this????

  3. Actually, and most strikingly, the ruling failed to address the central issue to the whole case: Namely, Black Knight/LPS, who was NEVER a party to the State court litigation, and who is under a 2013 consent judgment in Indiana (where it has stipulated to the forgery of loan documents, the ones specifically at issue in my case)never disclosed itself in State court or remediated the forged loan documents as was REQUIRED of them by the CJ. In essence, what the court is willfully ignoring, is that it is setting a precedent that the supplier of a defective product, one whom is under a consent judgment stipulating to such, and under obligation to remediate said defective product, can: 1.) Ignore the CJ 2.) Allow counsel to commit fraud on the state court 3.) Then try to hide behind Rooker Feldman doctrine as a bar to being held culpable in federal court. The problem here is the court is in direct conflict with its own ruling(s) in Johnson v. Pushpin Holdings & Iqbal- 780 F.3d 728, at 730 “What Johnson adds - what the defendants in this suit have failed to appreciate—is that federal courts retain jurisdiction to award damages for fraud that imposes extrajudicial injury. The Supreme Court drew that very line in Exxon Mobil ... Iqbal alleges that the defendants conducted a racketeering enterprise that predates the state court’s judgments ...but Exxon Mobil shows that the Rooker Feldman doctrine asks what injury the plaintiff asks the federal court to redress, not whether the injury is “intertwined” with something else …Because Iqbal seeks damages for activity that (he alleges) predates the state litigation and caused injury independently of it, the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not block this suit. It must be reinstated.” So, as I already noted to others, I now have the chance to bring my case to SCOTUS; the ruling by Wood & Posner is flawed on numerous levels,BUT most troubling is the fact that the authors KNOW it's a flawed ruling and choose to ignore the flaws for one simple reason: The courts have decided to agree with former AG Eric Holder that national banks "Are too big to fail" and must win at any cost-even that of due process, case precedent, & the truth....Let's see if SCOTUS wants a bite at the apple.

  4. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

  5. I am in NJ & just found out that there is a judgment against me in an action by Driver's Solutions LLC in IN. I was never served with any Court pleadings, etc. and the only thing that I can find out is that they were using an old Staten Island NY address for me. I have been in NJ for over 20 years and cannot get any response from Drivers Solutions in IN. They have a different lawyer now. I need to get this vacated or stopped - it is now almost double & at 18%. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

ADVERTISEMENT