ILNews

IBA: Join the IndyBar at Komen Race for the Cure

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indianapolis Bar Association has formed a team for the upcoming Susan G. Komen Race for the Cure to be held on Saturday, April 16. IndyBar members, families and friends are invited to participate and support the cause by joining the IndyBar team or by making a donation toward the team.

The Komen Race for the Cure is an annual 5k run/walk is one of Indiana’s largest non-profit events. In fact, Central Indiana hosts the sixth largest Race for the Cure in the world out of 121 affiliates. The funds raised are awarded to grantees providing education, screening and support services in twenty-one Central Indiana counties and funding research seeking a cure for breast cancer.

Through the support of Dean Gary Roberts, the IndyBar team has been given permission to gather at the Indiana University School of Law entrance. Members of IndyBar’s Helping Enrich Attorney’s Lives (HEAL) Committee will be on hand providing IndyBar t-shirts to all members stopping by the law school prior to the start of the run/walk which is scheduled for 9:10 a.m. T-shirt handouts will begin at 8:00 a.m.

“So many of us in the Bar have sought ways to give support to friends and family that have been confronted with breast cancer,” said IndyBar President Mike Hebenstreit who will be leading the IndyBar group.

“It’s my hope that members of the Bar looking for an opportunity to show their support will join us at the race. It should also be a great way to renew acquaintances and make new ones,“ said Hebenstreit.

To join the team or to make a donation, log on to the Komen Race for the Cure Indianapolis website. The Bar’s team name is “IndyBar”.

Any questions prior to race day should be directed to Mary Kay Price at the IndyBar office by calling 317.269.2000 or emailing mprice@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

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. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  2. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  3. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  4. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  5. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

ADVERTISEMENT