ILNews

Indiana law firms named among best for women

IL Staff
August 9, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Three law firms based in Indiana or with offices in the state are among the 50 Best Law Firms for Women in the annual list compiled by Working Mother and consulting firm Flex-Time Lawyers LLC

Faegre Baker Daniels LLP, Ice Miller LLP and Littler Mendelson P.C. were named to the list. The rankings are based on firms that lead in attracting, retaining and promoting women attorneys.

The list doesn’t rank firms numerically. At Faegre, 37 percent of attorneys are women as are 20 percent of equity partners. Ice Miller also had 37 percent female lawyers and 24 percent of its equity partners are women. Littler, a San Francisco-based firm with a Northside Indianapolis office, has a force of 49 percent women attorneys, and 27 percent of its equity partners are women.

Working Mother commented on each firm.

Faegre: “The Women’s Forum for Achievement offered by this firm boasts a wide range of useful programs for lawyers, with educational sessions, discussion groups and workshops that cover success strategies, sponsorship, mentoring, leadership development and more.”

Ice Miller: “Intensive mentoring is a boon to new lawyers at this firm, who work with both peers and partners to strengthen core skills and devise long-range plans. On-site exercise classes, reimbursed gym memberships and $1,000 health-savings-account grants encourage fitness.”

Littler: “Showing support for its diverse workforce, this firm maintains myriad affinity groups and a vital women’s leadership initiative, along with sterling benefits and flex schedules. In 2012, 63 percent of associates, 76 percent of counsel and 32 percent of partners (equity and nonequity) were women.”      
 

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. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT