ILNews

IndyBar Green Legal Initiative Recognizes 27 Firms, Legal Departments for 2013

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The IndyBar Go Green Committee, a sub-committee of the Young Lawyers Division, has released its list of Green Legal Initiative firms for 2013. Now in its second year, the program recognizes legal businesses, including law practices, legal departments, courts, agencies, legal support services and other members of the community that have committed to engaging in environmentally responsible business operations.

Recognized for Outstanding Achievement in 2013 is Drewry Simmons Vornehm LLP, which has not only adopted green practices in its office but has also appointed a Sustainability Coordinator and Sustainability Team to assist in carrying out and evaluating its Sustainability Policy within the firm.

All Green Legal firms will be honored at the upcoming Indianapolis Bar Association & Foundation Recognition Luncheon on Nov. 14. For more information about the Go Green Committee and the Green Legal Initiative, visit indybar.org/resources/go-green.

2013 Green Legal Firms

Congratulations to these Green Legal Firms!

Green Legal Initiative Members:

Cantrell Strenski &  Mehringer LLP

Cohen & Malad LLP

Neighborhood Christian Legal Clinic

Mitchell & Associates

Robinson Wolenty & Young LLP

Barnes & Thornburg LLP

MillerMeyer LLP

Certifying Members: One Leaf (15-30 Points)

Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP

Indiana Court of Appeals

Hoover Hull

Wishard Health Services/Eskenazi Health (Legal Affairs)

Certifying Members: Two Leaves (31-45 Points)

Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Indiana

Benesch Friedlander Coplan & Aranoff LLP

Frost Brown Todd LLC

Indianapolis Bar Association and Foundation

Kightlinger & Gray LLP

Popcheff & Dinn LLP

Rolls Royce

Wanzer Edwards PC

Certifying Members: Three Leaves (41-60 Points)

Bowen & Associates LLC

Bose McKinney & Evans LLP

Drewry Simmons & Vornehm LLP

Harrison & Moberly LLP

Nelson Law Group, LLC

Plews Shadley Racher & Braun LLP

Richard A. Mann PC

Riley Bennett & Egloff LLP
 

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. Just an aside, but regardless of the outcome, I 'm proud of Judge William Hughes. He was the original magistrate on the Home place issue. He ruled for Home Place, and was primaried by Brainard for it. Their tool Poindexter failed to unseat Hughes, who won support for his honesty and courage throughout the county, and he was reelected Judge of Hamilton County's Superior Court. You can still stand for something and survive. Thanks, Judge Hughes!

  2. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

ADVERTISEMENT