IBA: Local Attorneys to Lead Baker & Daniels

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
froehle-tom-mugBW Froehle
barrett-david-mugBW Barrett
pfeiffer-hud-mugBW Pfeiffer

Baker & Daniels LLP has announced its top leadership positions for 2011, including the election of Indianapolis lawyer David Barrett and re-election of Hud Pfeiffer to three-year terms on the law firm’s strategic and policy board.

Tom Froehle, former member of the Indianapolis Bar Foundation Board of Directors, is Baker & Daniels chair and chief executive partner. He re-appointed the following as members of the firm’s executive committee:

Roger Flower, chief operating officer;

Steve Jackson, who focuses his legal practice in health care and life sciences;

Scott Kosnoff, managing partner for professional personnel who practices in insurance and financial services;

Greg Utken, managing partner for legal practices who focuses his practice in labor and employment law; and

Froehle also is a member of the executive committee, which is responsible for day-to-day operations of the firm. Members of Baker & Daniels’ strategic and policy board include Froehle and Flower as well as:

David Barrett, a partner and group leader of the business and corporate finance team;

Mike Nader, a partner and group leader of the employee benefits practice;

Hud Pfeiffer, a partner and group leader of the labor and employment practice;

Chris Scanlon, a partner practicing in business and commercial litigation; and

Andrew Soshnick, a partner practicing in family law matters.

The strategic and policy board’s members are elected by the firm’s partners, and as its name implies, the board is responsible for establishing the strategic direction and policies for the firm.•


Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Heritage, what Heritage? The New Age is dawning .... an experiment in disordered liberty and social fragmentation is upon us .... "Carmel City Council approved a human rights ordinance with a 4-3 vote Monday night after hearing about two hours of divided public testimony. The ordinance bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, among other traits. Council members Rick Sharp, Carol Schleif, Sue Finkam and Ron Carter voted in favor of it. The three council members opposing it—Luci Snyder, Kevin Rider and Eric Seidensticker—all said they were against any form of discrimination, but had issues with the wording and possible unintended consequences of the proposal." Kardashian is the new Black.

  2. Can anyone please tell me if anyone is appealing the law that certain sex offenders can't be on school property. How is somebody supposed to watch their children's sports games or graduations, this law needs revised such as sex offenders that are on school property must have another non-offender adult with them at all times while on school property. That they must go to the event and then leave directly afterwards. This is only going to hurt the children of the offenders and the father/ son mother/ daughter vice versa relationship. Please email me and let me know if there is a group that is appealing this for reasons other than voting and religion. Thank you.

  3. Should any attorney who argues against the abortion industry, or presents arguments based upon the Founders' concept of Higher Law, (like that marriage precedes the State) have to check in with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program for a mandatory mental health review? Some think so ... that could certainly cut down on cases such as this "cluttering up" the SCOTUS docket ... use JLAP to deny all uber conservative attorneys licenses and uber conservative representation will tank. If the ends justify the means, why not?

  4. Tell them sherry Mckay told you to call, they're trying to get all the people that have been wronged and held unlawfully to sign up on this class action lawsuit.

  5. Call Young and Young aAttorneys at Law theres ones handling a class action lawsuit