ILNews

IndyBar: Have a Question? Just Ask a Lawyer!

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

By Leslie Pollie, Kopka Pinkus Dolin & Eads PC

It is no secret that the legal profession has been increasingly focused on community and pro bono services in the past few years. This emphasis has led many firms to recognize the pro bono efforts of their attorneys, with some firms enacting yearly pro bono hour requirements that count as credit toward an attorney’s billable hour requirement.
 

ask-a-lawyer-photo-15col.jpg An IndyBar volunteer assists a member of the public at the Indianapolis Public Library Central Library branch during the Spring 2013 Ask a Lawyer event on April 9.

What many attorneys may not realize is that the American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct also address a lawyer’s responsibility to share his or her legal knowledge and experience to those who cannot otherwise afford such services. ABA Model Rule 6.1 states “[e]very lawyer has a professional responsibility to provide legal services to those unable to pay.” Rule 6.1 goes on to recommend that every attorney aspire to donate 50 hours a year of pro bono services to the community. This may leave many attorneys, especially those new to the bar, wondering where or how to donate their time. Fortunately, attorneys in Indianapolis have to look no further than the Indianapolis Bar Association.

Indianapolis Bar Association’s Pro Bono Standing Committee oversees and provides support for many of the pro bono opportunities in Marion County, including the most popular—our Ask a Lawyer program. Since the spring of 2005, IndyBar attorney volunteers have served more than 5,000 members of the Indianapolis community both in person and by phone through this program, which is offered twice yearly in April and October.

Through the Ask a Lawyer program, attorneys reach out into the community to provide both knowledge and compassion. During each Ask a Lawyer event, nearly 100 member attorneys go to various Indianapolis Public Library branches to provide free legal advice to community residents. Anyone with legal questions can meet with a lawyer and have their questions answered. In order to serve as many citizens as possible, the consultations are limited to approximately fifteen minutes. The topics of discussion range from domestic matters and landlord/tenant issues to probate questions. Volunteers are provided with informational packets designed to guide them through many common questions and issues that have arisen throughout the years. In addition, volunteers are given contact information for other organizations that may provide additional assistance and representation to those in need.

Often, the attorney is able to answer questions, provide direction or additional information to the public about additional available legal services. For those attorneys, it is important to note that the consultations are anonymous and no additional follow up will occur. Consequently, attorneys are able to provide important information to the community.

The program would not be successful without the support of the dynamic IndyBar paralegal members as well. Paralegals serve as site coordinators, hitting neighborhoods in advance with posters to advertise the program, working with library staff, greeting the public and orientating the attorney volunteers before their shift.

Not only can members of the community meet with an attorney in person during the Ask a Lawyer program, they can also call in to the IndyBar office to get legal advice from an attorney over the phone during Legal Lines, which takes place from 6 to 8 p.m. on the second Tuesday of each month. As with the in-person meetings, the calls are confidential for both parties and do not establish an attorney-client relationship. This is also simply a two-hour time commitment.

Every quarter, the Pro Bono Standing Committee will be highlighting a different Indianapolis pro bono opportunity. The IndyBar strongly believes in its members and their ability to make a difference in the community and strives to provide a wide range of service opportunities. If you read about a program that interests you, please contact Caren Chopp at cchopp@indybar.org for more information about getting involved.•

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. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  2. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  3. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  4. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  5. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

ADVERTISEMENT