ILNews

IBA: It's Safe to Ask for Help

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Whether you are a sole practitioner or an attorney in a 200 attorney law firm, you have probably had a question at some point in your career that you struggled to answer – or perhaps you simply wanted a second opinion. Members of the Indianapolis Bar Association’s Senior Counsel Division Executive Committee have walked in those shoes, and as a result they offer a Safe Ask program.

The purpose of the Safe Ask program is to provide an option for IndyBar attorney members to seek confidential guidance and information from members of the IndyBar’s Senior Counsel Division (SCD) online or by phone. The sole goal of the program is to assist IndyBar members in providing high quality and ethical legal services to their clients.

“I recently fielded a Safe Ask from a young lawyer who had been put in a very tough spot by another member of his firm. He was very appreciative of the ability to talk confidentially with someone about the situation and praised the program,” said Jeffrey Meunier, a member of the Senior Counsel Division and Safe Ask Panel Member.

Since the practice of law is an art, there is usually no one “best” method to resolve a legal issue. Therefore, the assistance given by members of the IndyBar’s Senior Counsel Division should be considered as a recommended approach and not as a guarantee that it will obtain the desired results. Users of the program are advised to exercise their independent judgment in deciding upon their course of action.

Meunier noted, “Though we don’t get a high volume of calls, it is obviously provides an extremely valuable service.”

All communications remain confidential to the extent there is not a violation of the Rule of Professional Conduct (see Rule 8.3 of the Rules of Professional Conduct). To utilize the Safe Ask program IndyBar members simply telephone or e-mail a member of the Safe Ask panel. If e-mailing, please type IBA Safe Ask in the subject line of the e-mail. Those serving on the panel are Raymond Good, John Herrin Jr., Paul Kortepeter, Claire Lewis, John Render, Robert York, and Jeffrey Meunier. The full listing with contact information may be found on the IndyBar website, www.indybar.org.

If there is a concern about a Rule 8.3 violation, attorneys are encouraged to instead address those concerns to the highly capable members of the Indiana State Bar Association Ethics Committee.•

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. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. 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.

  4. 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?

  5. 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

ADVERTISEMENT