IndyBar: Interrogatories - Donald R. Lundberg

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

By Tyler D. Helmond, Voyles Zahn & Paul

Lundberg Don Lundberg

Donald R. Lundberg
Deputy General Counsel, Barnes & Thornburg

He is a graduate of the Indiana University Maurer School of Law – Bloomington. He served as Director of Litigation at the Legal Services Organization of Indiana and as the Executive Secretary of the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission before joining Barnes & Thornburg LLP. He is Donald Lundberg, and he has been served with interrogatories.

Q You spent about 20 years at the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission before leaving for private practice. What has been the biggest change?
A Remember, before that I was a lawyer for 15 years with what is now Indiana Legal Services. The biggest change for me has been experiencing the entrepreneurial aspects of the practice of law. New life experiences are good. I have been enjoying this one.

Q What is your default Starbucks order?
A Cuppa Joe. Black, no sugar. I’m easy to please.

Q If you decided to start tweeting, what would your twitter handle be?
Your question assumes I do not tweet. I would be offended if it weren’t true. Never having thought about it before, I’d draw on my Res Gestae column and select @EthicsCurbstone.

Q What is your favorite part about practicing at Barnes and Thornburg?
A Easy. The great colleagues and clients. In every legal job I have had, the things that have sustained me in the long run are the personal relationships.

Q If you had the opportunity to meet one deceased jurist through time travel, who would it be and why?
A I’d say Learned Hand, if for no other reason than it’s such a great name. And then there’s the fact that he had one of the great legal minds. The meeting would be embarrassing though, since I would be a blithering idiot.

Q Who are the lawyers you admire most?
A The ones who have the passion to serve their clients well, with the humanity to avoid being jerks to their fellow lawyers.

Q Letterman or Leno?
A What a question. Letterman. Are you really from around here?

Q If you were to give a law school commencement address to one of the classes of 2014, what would you say?
A I think the title might be “The Importance of Plan B.” Most folks who go to law school think they will do well. It is simple math that half of the class will do less well (according to GPA) than the other half. Opportunities to practice in established firms will be difficult for many new law graduates. And striking out on one’s own can be terrifying. Don’t get me wrong, I love being a lawyer and would never discourage someone from following a passion for the law into practice. In fact, the practice of law is no longer (if it ever was) a place for lawyers without passion for the work. But there are alternatives to traditional law practice that can be at least as gratifying and rewarding. Single-minded focus on practicing law can blind recent law graduates (and practicing lawyers, for that matter) to neat opportunities for which a law degree can be helpful, even if it is not necessary. As I think about it, this would be a depressing commencement address, which explains why I have never given one. I pity the law school commencement speakers of today who have to capture the excitement of becoming eligible for admission to practice while remaining realistic about the prospects.•


Post a comment to this story

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
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Lori, you must really love wedding cake stories like this one ... happy enuf ending for you?

  2. This new language about a warning has not been discussed at previous meetings. It's not available online. Since it must be made public knowledge before the vote, does anyone know exactly what it says? Further, this proposal was held up for 5 weeks because members Carol and Lucy insisted that all terms used be defined. So now, definitions are unnecessary and have not been inserted? Beyond these requirements, what is the logic behind giving one free pass to discriminators? Is that how laws work - break it once and that's ok? Just don't do it again? Three members of Carmel's council have done just about everything they can think of to prohibit an anti-discrimination ordinance in Carmel, much to Brainard's consternation, I'm told. These three 'want to be so careful' that they have failed to do what at least 13 other communities, including Martinsville, have already done. It's not being careful. It's standing in the way of what 60% of Carmel residents want. It's hurting CArmel in thT businesses have refused to locate because the council has not gotten with the program. And now they want to give discriminatory one free shot to do so. Unacceptable. Once three members leave the council because they lost their races, the Carmel council will have unanimous approval of the ordinance as originally drafted, not with a one free shot to discriminate freebie. That happens in January 2016. Why give a freebie when all we have to do is wait 3 months and get an ordinance with teeth from Day 1? If nothing else, can you please get s copy from Carmel and post it so we can see what else has changed in the proposal?

  3. Here is an interesting 2012 law review article for any who wish to dive deeper into this subject matter: Excerpt: "Judicial interpretation of the ADA has extended public entity liability to licensing agencies in the licensure and certification of attorneys.49 State bar examiners have the authority to conduct fitness investigations for the purpose of determining whether an applicant is a direct threat to the public.50 A “direct threat” is defined as “a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services as provided by § 35.139.”51 However, bar examiners may not utilize generalizations or stereotypes about the applicant’s disability in concluding that an applicant is a direct threat.52"

  4. We have been on the waiting list since 2009, i was notified almost 4 months ago that we were going to start receiving payments and we still have received nothing. Every time I call I'm told I just have to wait it's in the lawyers hands. Is everyone else still waiting?

  5. I hope you dont mind but to answer my question. What amendment does this case pretain to?