ILNews

IBA Frontlines

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Comment Period Extended for Possible Rule Changes

The comment period on a set of proposed rule amendments posted by the court in January 2011 has been extended to May 6, 2011. These rules address a variety of issues, including appellate, trial procedure, post-conviction, family court and evidentiary rules. For more information access the Indiana Supreme Court’s website.

Schuckit & Associates Names New Associates

Tim D. McKay
, Sandra L. Davis, Angela L. Hamm, Cari L. Sheehan, Christa J. Jewsbury and Paul J. Schilling have been named associates at the Zionsville firm Schuckit & Associates. 

Thank You, Ask a Lawyer Volunteers!

Thank you to all of the IndyBar members who graciously volunteered their time to assist with the IndyBar’s spring Ask a Lawyer program. Our 98 volunteers assisted more than 280 individuals at sites throughout the city and another 157 over the phone. Interested in Ask a Lawyer or other IndyBar pro bono programs?

Supreme Court Seeks Public Comment on Rules Regarding Temporary Admission

The Indiana Supreme Court’s Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure is interested in obtaining comments from judges, attorneys and the public as it reviews the process by which out-of-state attorneys may seek temporary admission to practice law in Indiana before administrative agencies. The comment deadline, originally set to end May 1, has been extended to May 6. For more information and details for submitting comments access the Indiana Supreme Court’s website.

Register for the 2011 Appellate Practice Section CLE Series and Save!

The Appellate Practice section has lined up an excellent slate of seminars for 2011, and for a limited time, you can register for all four seminars at once and save $20 for the year! Details on the series and seminar registration are available at www.indybar.org.

Enjoy a “Breakfast with the Bench!”

Ever wish you could talk directly with judicial officers and hear their thoughts and feedback for attorneys practicing in Marion County? Here is your chance! Don’t miss the first “Breakfast with the Bench” event coming up on Wednesday, May 11 from 7:30 to 8:30 a.m. at the IndyBar office. Participating judges include the Hon. Heather Welch, Hon. Theodore Sosin, Hon. Michael Keele and Hon. Thomas Carroll, all of the Marion Superior Court. This roundtable program includes 1.0 hour General CLE. Go to www.indybar.org for details and online registration.

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. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  2. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  3. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT