ILNews

IBA: IndyBar's First Women's Symposium Exceeds Goals

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Area lawyers gathered to attend the Women, Law & Leadership Symposium, hosted by the IndyBar Women and Law Division (WLD) on October 5 and 6, 2011 at the Crowne Plaza Hotel and Conference Center in downtown Indianapolis.

The day-and-a-half-long event marked the WLD’s 25th Anniversary. For twenty-five years, WLD has worked to promote the advancement of women in the Indianapolis legal community by providing a variety of educational, networking, and philanthropic engagements and opportunities.
 

wld-photo-1-15col.jpg An enthusiastic crowd gathered to kick off the IndyBar’s first Women’s Symposium at its opening reception at the Crowne Plaza Indianapolis.

The event opened with a reception and dinner on October 5. The dinner featured Martha S. West, Professor Emerita from University of California-Davis, as keynote speaker. Professor West’s address was titled “Choices and Changes.” Her remarks on reproductive decision-making kept the audience buzzing the following day. Also at the dinner, WLD presented its annual Antoinette Dakin Leach award to the Honorable Margret Robb. Judge Robb, who was recently appointed Chief Judge of the Indiana Court of Appeals, impressed the audience with an inspiring address in which she remarked on the early hardships faced by women in law and the demonstrable progress that has been made in recent years.

On October 6, the Symposium began with a Table Topics breakfast, during which attendees enjoyed breakfast while participating in discussions on several timely self-improvement topics. The conference attendees next participated in a plenary session titled “Building Your Success,” featuring three panels composed almost entirely of past Antoinette Dakin Leach award winners. First, Ann Delaney, Monica Foster, and the Honorable Denise LaRue provided insight and guidance on personally defining success. Second, Abigail Kuzma, the Honorable Jane Magnus-Stinson, and Myra Selby discussed the importance of mentoring and advised regarding finding mentors and navigating the mentor-mentee relationship. Third, Deborah Daniels, Francina Dlouhy, and Heather Wilson relayed insightful and practical advice about how the attendees can brand and market themselves to improve their business development proficiency.



wld-photo-5-15col.jpg Lawyers from a variety of practice areas and practice environments packed the meeting rooms to learn about a broad spectrum of topics.

At mid-day, attendees gathered for the Symposium’s “Leadership Luncheon” featuring Roberta Liebenberg, a senior partner at Fine Kaplan and Black, RPC in Philadelphia and the immediate past chair of the American Bar Association’s Commission on Women in the Profession. In her remarks, Ms. Liebenberg detailed how, despite comprising nearly 50 percent of law school student bodies for many years, the number of women in leadership roles in law firms continues to lag far behind men due to what she described as “implicit bias” that impacts many areas of law firm decision-making. Ms. Liebenberg shared with the audience her views on how organizations can begin to eradicate implicit bias as well as specific strategies to help women lawyers advance in law firms and other workplace settings.


wld-photo-2web-1col.jpg (Left) Christi Anderson, Shannon Landreth, Whitney Mosby, Meg Christensen all of Bingham McHale and Debi Edwards of Heritage Environmental Services enjoy an evening of networking and camaraderie.

Following lunch, the Symposium offered attendees their choice of CLE break-out sessions. Among the timely topics covered in the afternoon sessions was “Diversity as a Competitive Advantage,” featuring the nationally recognized legal scholar William Henderson. Marion County judges, Hon. Cale Bradford, Hon. Sheila Carlisle, and Hon. Heather Welch presented “In the Courtroom: Advice from the Bench.” A panel of five lawyers, including Indiana Department of Labor Commissioner Lori Torres, presented “Human Trafficking: Closer to Home Than You Think.” A total of eight sessions led by panels of well-known lawyers from the Indianapolis legal community comprised the afternoon’s program.

The Symposium Planning Committee was pleased to receive sponsorship funding from its Gold Sponsor, Ice Miller LLP, and Silver Sponsors Cantrell Strenski & Mehringer and DeLaney & DeLaney LLC. Bronze sponsors included Baker & Daniels, Frank Law, Krieg DeVault, LewisWagner LLP, Spotlight Strategies, and Stewart & Irwin PC. Due to the generosity of several organizations, nine law students and recent law school graduates received scholarships that permitted them to attend the Symposium free of charge.


wld-photo-4web-1col.jpg Carol Nemeth Joven of Price Waicukauski & Riley and Christina Clark of Baker & Daniels congratulate The Hon. Margret Robb, Chief Judge of the Indiana Court of Appeals, 2011 recipient of the IndyBar Women and the Law Division’s Antoinette Dakin Leach Award.

One Symposium presenter, Jim Dimos, partner at Frost Brown Todd, stated that he “enjoyed having the opportunity to participate in the conference. It was well done and I hope that the Division feels it was successful – from my perspective it certainly was.” Frank Law owner Leona Frank reflected that the Symposium “was amazing. The program descriptions did not do justice to the level of speaker and the phenomenal content.”

WLD’s goal in presenting the Symposium was to provide thought-provoking educational programs and an arena for area lawyers to come together to establish new relationships and strengthen existing ones. Thanks to the contributions and support of the dedicated members of the Symposium Planning Committee, the WLD Executive Committee, the IndyBar staff, the Symposium Sponsors, and the myriad of speakers, WLD’s goals were met and exceeded.•

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. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT