ILNews

IndyBar: Indianapolis Bar Foundation to Award $35,000 Grant

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indianapolis Bar Foundation (IBF) is now accepting applications through April 1 for its Impact Fund Grant of at least $35,000 to be awarded in late May 2014. Application instructions and additional information can be found at indybar.org/ibf.

The IBF Impact Fund serves as an important vehicle to facilitate the financial generosity of members of the Indianapolis Bar Association. Through the Impact Fund, the IBF seeks to invest substantial funds and IndyBar member participation in support of a project presented by a non-profit organization that seeks to affect a significant positive impact in central Indiana.

The grant will be awarded to a non-profit organization that presents an initiative that will advance the administration of justice and an understanding of the law through philanthropy, education, and service. The grant criteria include the following: the project must present an opportunity for IndyBar members to support the initiative by providing human resources, the project should be either a new venture or the significant supplementation of an existing service, the project should articulate a plan to be sustained by additional funding beyond that provided by the IBF, and the project should enhance public understanding and awareness of the legal profession.

The grant was awarded to Indiana Legal Services’ Military Assistance Project in 2013 and to Reach for Youth for its Teen Court program in 2012. In 2011, Indiana University’s Health & Human Rights Clinic located in Haughville was chosen to receive the Impact Grant.

In addition to the Impact Fund, the IBF grants $105,000 to a variety of legal advice and community service programs co-sponsored with the Indianapolis Bar Association. Some of the programs funded include Ask a Lawyer, Legal Line, the Bankruptcy Help Line, and educational programming at the Bench Bar Conference. Additional information about the Indianapolis Bar Foundation and the Impact Fund Grant can be found at indybar.org/ibf.

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. 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.

  2. 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?

  3. 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

  4. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

  5. While this right is guaranteed by our Constitution, it has in recent years been hampered by insurance companies, i.e.; the practice of the plaintiff's own insurance company intervening in an action and filing a lien against any proceeds paid to their insured. In essence, causing an additional financial hurdle for a plaintiff to overcome at trial in terms of overall award. In a very real sense an injured party in exercise of their right to trial by jury may be the only party in a cause that would end up with zero compensation.

ADVERTISEMENT