ILNews

IBA Frontlines

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

IndyBar Members Leading Board of Law Examiners

The Indiana Supreme Court recently appointed two IndyBar members as officers to the Indiana State Board of Law Examiners (BLE) and appointed another as a member of the Board. Jon B. Laramore of Baker & Daniels is now President of the Board and María Pabón López of Indiana University School of Law – Indianapolis is Vice President. Kathryn Hillebrands Burroughs of Woolsey Cross & Glazier was appointed to participate as a member of the Board. They will serve in these roles until December 1, 2011.

Bar Members on the Move

Jaimie L. Zibrowski has joined the Indianapolis firm Ruppert & Schaefer as an associate. She received her Juris Doctorate with Honors from the George Washington University Law School in Washington, DC. and a Bachelor of Arts degree summa cum laude from Indiana State University in Legal Studies.

The firm of Katz & Korin has announced the addition of M. Alex Beatty and Henry Mestetsky as associates. Mr. Beatty earned his B.A. in Political Science from Indiana University Southeast and his J.D. cum laude from the Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis. Mr. Mestetsky earned his B.S. from the Indiana University Kelley School of Business - Indianapolis in 2007, where he double majored in Accounting and Finance. He earned his J.D. from Indiana University Maurer School of Law–Bloomington.

Caroline E. Richardson has joined the Benesch firm as an associate in its Business Reorganization Practice Group. Ms. Richardson focuses her practice on commercial litigation, bankruptcy, finance, insolvency and restructuring. Ms. Richardson received her B.A. from Furman University, cum laude, and her J.D., cum laude, from the Indiana University School of Law–Indianapolis.

Supreme Court Accepting Applications for State Public Defender

The Indiana Supreme Court announced Friday that it is currently accepting applications for the position of State Public Defender, which the court appoints for a four year term. All applications must be submitted by Sunday, April 10. For additional details and application instructions see the Supreme Court website.

Registration Open for POPBP Training

Interested in helping low-income women caught up in domestic violence? The next training session for Protective Order Pro Bono Project Volunteers will be held from 11:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. on Friday, April 15 at the Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence’s office at 1915 W. 18th St. View additional details or register www.icadvinc.org. The training is free to those who take one case; 4 hours CLE credit, including 1 hour ethics, is available.

2011 Bench Bar Scholarship Applications Available

The Indianapolis Bar Association, in conjunction with the Indianapolis Bar Foundation, is now accepting scholarship applications for the 2011 Bench Bar Conference to be held June 16-18 at the French Lick Springs Resort & Casino. 

Named for an exceptional lawyer and Past President of the IndyBar, the Neil E. Shook Bench Bar Conference Scholarships are available to attorneys with preference given to those individuals demonstrating interest in active Indianapolis Bar Association and/or Indianapolis Bar Foundation participation AND to those in practice five year or less.

The scholarship includes waiver of Friday Arrival Full Conference registration and Friday night lodging (a $430 value). Multiple scholarships are available. Application forms are available at www.indybenchbar.org and are due by May 1. Notifications will be made by May 5.

Need APC Credit?

The IndyBar has the Applied Professionalism Course for you. Featuring esteemed presenters and interactive breakout sessions, the IndyBar’s Applied Professionalism Course on April 28 is the perfect way to satisfy this credit requirement for attorneys in their first three years of practice. To learn more and to register go to 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. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. Please I need help with my class action lawsuits, im currently in pro-se and im having hard time findiNG A LAWYER TO ASSIST ME

  5. Access to the court (judiciary branch of government) is the REAL problem, NOT necessarily lack of access to an attorney. Unfortunately, I've lived in a legal and financial hell for the past six years due to a divorce (where I was, supposedly, represented by an attorney) in which I was defrauded of settlement and the other party (and helpers) enriched through the fraud. When I attempted to introduce evidence and testify (pro se) in a foreclosure/eviction, I was silenced (apparently on procedural grounds, as research I've done since indicates). I was thrown out of a residence which was to be sold, by a judge who refused to allow me to speak in (the supposedly "informal") small claims court where the eviction proceeding (by ex-brother-in-law) was held. Six years and I can't even get back on solid or stable ground ... having bank account seized twice, unlawfully ... and now, for the past year, being dragged into court - again, contrary to law and appellate decisions - by former attorney, who is trying to force payment from exempt funds. Friday will mark fifth appearance. Hopefully, I'll be allowed to speak. The situation I find myself in shouldn't even be possible, much less dragging out with no end in sight, for years. I've done nothing wrong, but am watching a lot of wrong being accomplished under court jurisdiction; only because I was married to someone who wanted and was granted a divorce (but was not willing to assume the responsibilities that come with granting the divorce). In fact, the recalcitrant party was enriched by well over $100k, although it was necessarily split with other actors. Pro bono help? It's a nice dream ... but that's all it is, for too many. Meanwhile, injustice marches on.

ADVERTISEMENT