ILNews

IBA: Volunteers Needed for National High School Mock Trial Championship

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

For the first time, Indiana will host the 2013 National High School Mock Trial Championship May 9-11, 2013, in downtown Indianapolis. High school mock trial teams, coaches and judges from all over the country will converge on Indianapolis, and attorneys and judges are needed to fill approximately 400 judge positions.

If you have judged mock trial in the past, you know these students are capable of great performances; the caliber of the teams at the national level is truly top notch! Non-lawyer volunteers are also needed to fill administrative capacities, such as court room liaisons, hospitality volunteers, and others.

Also, for the first time, attorneys who volunteer to judge will be eligible to earn free CLE credits. A one-hour educational program will be offered and will be available for viewing via recording, which will earn one hour of CLE credit. Thereafter, any attorney who has viewed the program will be eligible for one additional hour of CLE credit for each round judged, for a total possible 5 hours of free CLE.

A competition of this magnitude cannot be hosted without help from the legal community, so your participation would be greatly appreciated by the organizers. To register as a volunteer, go to www.inmocktrial.org/RS/WelcomeMainPage.php. Additional details will follow regarding case materials and competition rules.

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT