ILNews

IBA: Nod to Professionalism

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

 

cline-lance-mug.jpg Lance Cline Cline Farrell Christie & Lee
pinnick-jon-mug.jpg Jon Pinnick Schultz & Pogue LLP

The Indianapolis Bar Association’s Standing Committee on Professionalism seeks to promote positive images of lawyers throughout the Indianapolis community and within our bar. To this end, we acknowledge local practitioners who exemplify professionalism and civility. At the recommendation of a Marion Superior Court Judge, the Committee extends a Nod to Professionalism to Jon Pinnick of Schultz & Pogue and Lance Cline of Cline Farrell Christie & Lee for their exceptional professionalism and advocacy in a complex and lengthy medical malpractice jury trial.

According to Mr. Cline, attorneys should focus on three tenets of professionalism at trial: (1) The golden rule – and be serious about this; (2) Remember we are all officers of the court – we have equal responsibilities to the court, its staff, and opposing counsel; and (3) Preparedness for trial. Mr. Pinnick echoes these sentiments and stresses that preparedness of counsel is “everything.”

This past August, Mr. Cline and Mr. Pinnick embodied each of these tenets of professionalism during an complex and lengthy jury trial involving over 20 witnesses, most of whom were expert witnesses. Both attorneys earned the trust of their peers, the jury, and the court through their preparedness, professionalism, and civility to each other. Despite arguing disputed evidentiary questions, both attorneys remained calm and respectful throughout the litigation. The judge commented that both Mr. Pinnick and Mr. Cline handled evidentiary objections professionally, direct and cross examination of witnesses professionally, and made their arguments to the bench or to the jurors and did not argue with each other or lose their professionalism or civility throughout the two-week jury trial. The judge commented that she wished that she could have videotaped this trial to play to young or inexperienced attorneys to demonstrate that attorneys can be professional and respectful of each other and still represent their client.

The jury expressed to the judge how much they enjoyed both attorneys and wondered if all attorneys were as competent, professional, and civil as Mr. Pinnick and Mr. Cline. Both attorneys embodied the ideals of professionalism and civility and as a result eight citizens/jurors left with a positive imagine of attorneys in the Indianapolis community. This trial demonstrates that attorneys who conduct themselves with civility and professionalism are the most effective advocates for their clients.

The Standing Committee on Professionalism compliments attorneys Jon Pinnick and Lance Cline for their exemplary example of professionalism and civility at its best.•

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