ILNews

IBA: It's Dues Renewal Time!

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Renew your membership in the only local organization singularly committed to the Indianapolis legal community and its practitioners. Bolstered by more than 5,000 members, the Indianapolis Bar Association and its leaders work tirelessly to provide resources, programming and initiatives to make your career more successful, more efficient, and more satisfying.

Jump online to www.indybar.org to renew your membership online, or simply return the printed renewal statement mailed in mid-November. Questions or concerns? Contact us at iba@indybar.org.

We’re working for you. These initiatives and much more have launched or are underway to benefit YOU as an IndyBar member:

CLE on your schedule. Get your CLE credit when you want it, where you want it—online IndyBar CLE programming to debut in first quarter 2013.

Customized, robust communications. With a multi-year, multi-faceted communications initiative underway, the IndyBar is working to be your one-stop-shop for quality content and resources relevant to your practice and career.

With you on the go. Accessing the member directory and registering for programs on your phone is a snap with the bar’s new mobile-optimized website.

Expanded investment in your business success. Launched in 2012, Indy Lawyer Finder connects panelists to potential clients searching for legal representation online, complementing our existing Lawyer Referral Service call-in program. Both services are available exclusively to IndyBar members.

Adapting to your changing needs. The legal community is constantly evolving. The IndyBar is responding with the creation of the new Indy Attorneys Network section and the 2013 CLE Pilot Program, which bundles section membership and CLE into one convenient package for select groups.•
 

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT