ILNews

IndyBar: Jodie L. Bergeron Named IndyBar Paralegal of the Year

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indianapolis Bar Association is proud to recognize Jodie L. Bergeron of Cohen & Malad LLP as the association’s Paralegal of the Year for 2014. Bergeron will be recognized for this honor at the IndyBar Paralegal Appreciation Luncheon, to be held Thursday, Aug. 14 from noon to 1 p.m. at The Conrad Indianapolis.
 

bergeron-jodie-iba.jpg Bergeron

Bergeron joined the Indianapolis Bar Association in 2008. She is an at-large committee member for the association’s Paralegal Committee, having chaired the committee in 2011, and helps to organize the committee’s Bears on Patrol Teddy Bear Drive. She has led the way for the Cohen & Malad team, which has placed in the top three firms that collect the most bears for the past several years. In addition to her work with the Paralegal Committee, Bergeron currently serves as a site coordinator for the association’s Ask A Lawyer program.

While Bergeron participates in many events through the IndyBar, she takes advantage of volunteer opportunities through her firm as well. She participates on the firm’s Race for the Cure team and has helped raise funds through sponsorships and bake sales for the Susan G. Komen Foundation. She also serves on Cohen & Malad’s Green Legal Committee, which serves to aid the firm’s commitment to the association’s Green Legal Initiative.

Bergeron’s nomination notes, “Jodie Bergeron is an outstanding individual who takes her commitment to the firm and to the Indianapolis legal community seriously. Jodie shows a great deal of initiative in ensuring that our personal injury and product liability practice has an organized client intake process, timely file follow-up procedure, and thorough trial preparation standard. She always has a big smile on her face and is eager to find a way to make something work. No challenge is too big for Jodie.”

Join us in honoring Bergeron and the work of many dedicated paralegals at the Paralegal Appreciation Luncheon Aug. 14. Register online at indybar.org/events.•

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. I need an experienced attorney to handle a breach of contract matter. Kindly respond for more details. Graham Young

  2. I thought the slurs were the least grave aspects of her misconduct, since they had nothing to do with her being on the bench. Why then do I suspect they were the focus? I find this a troubling trend. At least she was allowed to keep her law license.

  3. Section 6 of Article I of the Indiana Constitution is pretty clear and unequivocal: "Section 6. No money shall be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious or theological institution."

  4. Video pen? Nice work, "JW"! Let this be a lesson and a caution to all disgruntled ex-spouses (or soon-to-be ex-spouses) . . . you may think that altercation is going to get you some satisfaction . . . it will not.

  5. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

ADVERTISEMENT