ILNews

IBA: Lawyer Referral Service to Reduce Fees and Upgrade Services

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Last week the Indianapolis Bar Association’s Board of Directors approved a plan that provides for a reduction in Lawyer Referral Service member fees while increasing marketing efforts and adding online reporting of referrals made. Believing that the Lawyer Referral Service provides the highest return on investment of any practice development tool available, effort is being directed at making the service more accessible to today’s attorney.

Effective immediately, those attorneys participating in the service will pay a flat rate of $250 compared to the average fee of $267 previously paid. Attorneys in practice less than three years will only pay $175. Participation in the service requires proof of $1 million in professional liability insurance and membership in the Indianapolis Bar.

Each year an average of 18,000 central Indiana residents are provided with an attorney referral through the Indianapolis Bar Association. Much about the process of promoting the services and the methods used to provide referral information has remained unchanged for over 15 years. That’s also about to change.

The Legal Services Advisory Committee that oversees the operation of the LRS is in discussion to begin television advertisements to promote the service. “We are excited to begin a new era of the Lawyer Referral Service. Our upcoming advertising campaign promises to increase call volume and quality. Our hope is that this service will provide our Panel members with an extremely economical means to gain new clients and build their practice,” said Jeff Meunier, chair of the committee.

New webpages are in development to guide online users, and the Bar is reviewing other methods for improving the quality of referrals made.

Make no mistake. These changes are not being made because LRS use is declining. On the contrary, in 2009 the number of referrals made slightly higher than the previous year, LRS attorney membership remained steady, and those participating generated nearly $1.4 million in total income from cases referred.

Keep an eye on the LRS. Good things are happening.•

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